Resi l ience Thinking and Doing
Resilience thinking and doing consider proactive strategies involving multiple capitals or assets in an integrated way. Resilience thinking strategies would balance short-term and long-term profitability, health, vitality, and adaptability with demands and changes that may cause increased risk, stress, and for some, crisis (Danes, 2014; Darnhofer, 2010; Darnhofer, 2014; Darnhofer et al., 2010; Darnhofer et al., 2016). Farm and family resilience thinking can help build protective and resilience capital, resources, or assets to prevent, manage, and recover from stressful situations and crises. By using resilience thinking to gain multiple insights into farm management practices, farmers may be better able to balance short and long- term costs and benefits to the health and financial well-being of the farming enterprise and that of the farm family (Yang & Danes, 2015). Resilience thinking and doing can also be practiced by professionals who support the population. In Extension, professionals in agriculture, family and consumer science, community development, and 4-H can practice resilience thinking and doing as they develop, deliver and evaluate their programs. Communities can practice resilience thinking and doing when they collaborate to address issues and problems impacting the community as a whole and sectors of the community.
Seven principles for building resilience in social- ecological systems are illustrated in this narrated 3- minute video titled Applying Resilience Thinking. The 2019 video is produced by the Stockholm Resilience Centre at Stockholm University. Site: https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/rese arch-news/2015-02-19-applying-resilience- thinking.html
VIDEO
Video: https://youtu.be/khep7hHeZG8
Bui lding Resi l ience - Social Ecological Systems
Efforts to change behaviors and conditions will have limited impact if the focus is only on individuals. An example of this type of intervention is Extension’s stress management programming. While important and likel y necessary, it is not sufficient to prevent or reduce the impact of stressors. A study of one state’s response to the 1980’s farm crisis emphasized the need to go beyond the farmer as a victim to the environments, or systems, in which farmers are embedded to make a change (Delind,1986). In a study of stress and health over a 50-year time period, the researcher concluded that individuals with high levels of stress mastery, self-esteem, and/or social support are able to reduce the impacts of stressors on health and well-being (Thoits, 2010). The research also provided evidence that structural conditions (i.e., food and health access, discrimination, trade policy) put people at risk, requiring interventions at community and policy arenas. In a Midwest study of farming stress, key informants said that a number of acute and chronic stressors were structural and outside of individual farmers’ control (Henning -Smith et al., 2021). These findings reinforce the need for a systems approach to preventing and mitigating stressors.
47
Powered by FlippingBook