An official website of the United States government
In April of 2019, the Rockefeller Foundation's ‘100 Resilient Cities’ (100RC) programme abruptly shuttered, surprising programme proponents and critics alike. In this paper, we explore why this happened, why some styles of geographic critique could not anticipate 100RC’s closure, and what this inability means for dominant strands of critical geographic analysis. To answer these questions, we bring literature on the biopolitics of resilience, technopolitics and Black geographies to bear on the case of Greater Miami resilience planning. We argue that answers to these questions revolve around the designerly roots of resilience thinking, whose distinct intellectual lineage conventional critical approaches have struggled to pick up on. We show how, on the one hand, design practices of synthesis in Greater Miami attempted to frame and instrumentalise Black histories of and experiences with racial and environmental violence as bounded knowledge that could improve the functioning of complex systems. On the other hand, synthesis created overflowings: opaque knowledges and experiences that resist the framing process and continue to mediate political battles over what resilience in Greater Miami practically becomes. Based on the case, we propose that an inductive style of critique that traces processes of framing and overflowing can help advance critical geographic analysis. As we illustrate in the paper, this mode of critique pays specific attention to the opaque, historically and contextually specific knowledges and experiences that refuse to be framed or synthesised, and work to counter-frame dominant conceptions of resilience—critical and conventional alike.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on September 19, 2026
Resilience, critique and the limits of geographic thought in the Anthropocene
As resilience has become an increasingly influential governance principle, geographers have been among the most ardent critics of the concept and its depoliticizing effects. But what might the last decade of geographic critiques of resilience tell us about the geographic thought today? Situating geographic research on resilience in the discipline’s reparative conjuncture and the problematic of the Anthropocene, this paper draws attention to what I call salvage geographies. Playing on James Clifford's (1986), sense of salvage ethnographies, salvage geographies refer to practices of geographic knowledge production that are organized around desires to secure the promise of modernist futurity in the Anthropocene. Analyzing the affective landscapes shaping critical geographic resilience research, I identity two forms of salvage geographies: first, solutions-oriented approaches prevalent in critical sustainability studies strive to salvage modernity’s promise for science to secure a future of limitless, progressive growth and development; second, radical approaches prevalent in political ecology and security studies often strive to salvage the promise of modernist critique to politicize knowledge. These salvage geographies can only be sustained through the instrumentalization of difference, which defutures or consumes the potential for other forms of geographic thought. Turning to feminist, decolonial, and abolitionist research, I highlight the potential for reparative disciplinary futures that orient geography towards problem-finding rather than problem-solving activities.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10643737
- Publisher / Repository:
- Elsevier
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Geoforum
- ISSN:
- 0016-7185
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Resilience Critique Epistemology Geographic thought Anthropocene
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Responding to recent work in critical cartographic studies and Black Geographies, the purpose of this paper is to offer a conceptual framework and a set of evocative cartographic engagements that can inform geography as it recovers the seldom discussed history of counter-mapping within the African American Freedom Struggle. Black resistant cartographies stretch what constitutes a map, the political work performed by maps, and the practices, spaces, and political-affective dimensions of mapping. We offer an extended illustration of the conventional and unconventional mapping behind USA anti-lynching campaigns of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, high-lighting the knowledge production practices of the NAACP and the Tuskegee Institute’s Monroe Work, and the embodied counter-mapping of journalist/activist Ida B. Wells. Recognizing that civil rights struggles are long, always unfolding, and relationally tied over time and space, we link this look from the past to contemporary, ongoing resistant cartographical practices as scholars/activists continue to challenge racialized violence and advance transitional justice, including the noted memory-work of the Equal Justice Initiative. An understanding of African American traditions of counter-mapping is about more than simply inserting the Black experience into our dominant ideas about cartography or even resistant mapping. Black geographies has much to teach cartography and geographers about what people of color engaged in antiracist struggles define as geographic knowledge and mapping practices on their own terms.more » « less
-
There is growing recognition of the importance of reciprocity between researchers and those involved in or affected by research, especially in sensitive field contexts such as disaster settings. Minimal applied guidance exists for researchers about how to practice reciprocity, however, resulting in several questions that have yet to be explored: What are the key considerations for practicing reciprocity in research? What potential unintended consequences should researchers be aware of when engaging in reciprocity? What practical strategies can help prepare researchers to engage in reciprocity and address challenges as they arise? Based on a systematic literature review—reflecting the shift of recent conceptions of reciprocity from transactional to more relational approaches—we offer a new, unifying definition of reciprocity as “an ongoing practice of critical reflection, relationship building, and exchange in which researchers are obligated to strive to produce mutual benefits for the people involved in or affected by the research process.” To motivate the practice of reciprocity, we highlight three key benefits: cultivating trust, addressing power imbalances, and improving research relevance. Additionally, through qualitative analysis of 53 research reports, we develop a typology of reciprocity in hazards and disaster research that clarifies six specific forms reciprocity can take, including: (1) centering participants and communities; (2) being empathetic and mindful of participant diversity; (3) sharing research results; (4) improving research and research team processes; (5) supporting learning, career development, or institutions; and (6) offering compensation. Finally, we outline potential challenges to practicing reciprocity and conclude with practical strategies for enhanced ethical grounding and effectiveness.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)The onset of the Anthropocene necessitates new forms of environmental planning and management as communities adapt to new ecological realities. Despite the global reach of the Anthropocene, localized adaptation strategies are critical for a successful transition into this new epoch. Within local contexts, inclusive, democratic political processes facilitate complex and effective ecological solutions to social problems resulting from environmental change. Genuine incorporation of local knowledge into the decision-making process is critical to fostering this ecological democracy and building effective adaptation strategies. Coastal systems are important nexus points to investigate the relationship between environmental problems and social processes. Fisheries are a critical piece of coastal systems that sustain local communities and the larger economy. I provide a case study of local adaptation to ecological changes as the State of Louisiana attempts to protect vulnerable communities, infrastructure, and fisheries through coastal planning and management. Louisiana’s fisheries are a critical asset that stand to be significantly impacted by continuing coastal erosion. Like the Anthropocene itself, Louisiana’s coastal erosion crisis is largely the result of human intervention in the biosphere for social and economic purposes. The state’s adaptive response is an ambitious master plan that seeks to rebuild the coast and protect its communities and economic interests. Although the plan is ambitious and generally lauded, I argue that the top-down approach the State of Louisiana uses in setting coastal priorities undercuts the plan’s efficacy by struggling to incorporate local knowledge and establish a trusting relationship with coastal stakeholders. Without a genuinely deliberative process that bridges across scales and knowledge systems, the state will ultimately struggle to draw in local knowledge, inhibiting comanagement of local fisheries and potentially undermining the ecological solutions it aims to achieve.more » « less
-
Abstract In recent years there has been an increasing emphasis on achieving convergence in disaster research, policy, and programs to reduce disaster losses and enhance social well-being. However, there remain considerable gaps in understanding “how do we actually do convergence?” In this article, we present three case studies from across geographies—New South Wales in Australia, and North Carolina and Oregon in the United States; and sectors of work—community, environmental, and urban resilience, to critically examine what convergence entails and how it can enable diverse disciplines, people, and institutions to reduce vulnerability to systemic risks in the twenty-first century. We identify key successes, challenges, and barriers to convergence. We build on current discussions around the need for convergence research to be problem-focused and solutions-based, by also considering the need to approach convergence as ethic, method, and outcome. We reflect on how convergence can be approached as an ethic that motivates a higher order alignment on “why” we come together; as a method that foregrounds “how” we come together in inclusive ways; and as an outcome that highlights “what” must be done to successfully translate research findings into the policy and public domains.more » « less
