Cited by 540Disaster Management and ResilienceSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceRegional resilience and development

Resilience for Whom? Emerging Critical Geographies of Socio‐ecological Resilience

Open access
Cretney, Raven·2014·Geography Compass

Abstract

Resilience has fast become a popular catchphrase used by government, international finance organisations, NGOs, community groups and activists all over the globe. Despite its widespread use, there remains confusion over what resilience is and the purpose it serves. Resilience can, in some cases, speak to a desire to successfully respond and adapt to disruptions outside of the status quo. However, this conceptualisation of resilience is far from uncontested. Emerging research has shown a lack of consideration for power, agency and inequality in popular and academic use of these frameworks. Criticism has also been raised regarding the use of resilience to justify projects informed by neoliberal ideologies that aim to decrease state involvement, increase community self‐reliance and restructure social services. Despite this, resilience is being used by community and activist groups that aim to address local and global environmental and social issues. With this critical insight, the need has arisen to question what is being maintained, for whom and by whom, through these discourses of resilience. In this review, I trace the evolution of the concept in the literature. Building on this, I discuss three interpretations of the resilience paradigm in current academic, political and activist arenas. I conclude by discussing possible future directions for critical geographic perspectives of resilience.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/gec3.12154

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Since the 1990s, hyper-securitization of borders after the US 'war on terror' has made resettlement opportunities for South Sudanese refugees virtually non-existent.

    “Since then, however, hyper-securitization of borders, which had skyrocketed with the US-waged 'war on terror' of the early 2000s (Cretney 2014), meant that resettlement opportunities had become virtually non-existent (Hansen 2018).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cretney, R.
Affiliations
Victoria University (AU)
Corresponding author
Cretney, Raven
Venue
Geography Compass
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-09
Volume
8
Issue
9
Pages
627-640
ISSN
1749-8198 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126029677
Cited by
540
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 77 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 107 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 13
FWCI
63.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Geography Compass (publishedVersion)
  • Victoria University Research Repository (Victoria University) (submittedVersion)
  • RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Regional resilience and development
Keywords
resilience, social-ecological resilience, critical geography, power and agency, inequality, neoliberalism, community self-reliance, environmental activism, resilience discourse, state involvement, social services

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review