Search results

Building disaster‐resilient communities is one of the strategies of reducing the impact of disasters in marginalised communities. In Zimbabwe, the role of Rural District Councils (RDCs) as facilitating agencies in the realisation of this agenda cannot be overemphasised. However, at present, RDCs are unlikely to be effective towards the realisation of the disaster risk reduction agenda because, in effect, this means finding ways of tackling well known development problems for which there are no easy or obvious solutions. Using case study material from Binga RDC in the Zambezi Valley, Zimbabwe, this paper seeks to argue that building institutional capacity for RDCs is fundamental if the disaster resilience agenda has to be realised.

The paper is based on the author's experiences in Binga District in Zimbabwe to show how disaster resilience is linked with capacity building, decentralisation and internal organisational structures of RDCs.

RDCs are facing a number of challenges, which include inadequate financial and human resources; unstable political system; problems related to decentralisation and the nature and role of RDCs in Zimbabwe. Capacity building, full decentralisation package and internal organisational structure of rural local authorities are some of the central fundamentals for building disaster‐resilient communities

With capacity building being at the centre of the building community resilience, coordination by donors as well as government agencies is fundamental. The circumstances under which RDCs are operating in Zimbabwe, highlights the implicit demand for the government to further consider fiscal and administrative aspects of the decentralisation. Proffering a devolved structure‐participation outcome scenario leaves RDCs in a miserable fiscal and administrative position to tackle issues related to long‐term disaster risk reduction and sustainable development.

The paper introduces the concept of disaster resilience focusing on Rural Local Authorities. It illuminates the complexities surrounding the delivery of the resilience agenda and how governments, local government authorities, donor community and civil society are implicated.

The fragile states and stabilisation concepts appear to resonate with the concept of community resilience. Yet, there is barely a framework that integrates the three concepts. The authors posit that despite the increasing interest in community resilience in fragile states, there is much less clarity of resilience, fragility and stabilisation connections. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This paper is based on the literature review of the concepts of community resilience, fragility and stabilisation.

The findings restate that the state fragility results from the breakdown of the social contract between the state and its citizens. Whilst both resilience and stabilisation are desirable constructs in reducing fragility, they should be broadly underpinned by agency not only to enhance preventive, anticipatory, absorptive and adaptive actions but also lead to social transformative capacity where agency is embedded for communities to exercise some sort of power to foster change.

This paper has encourages debate on resilience, fragility and stabilisation connections by suggesting framework for “doing” resilience-informed stabilisation programmes in fragile states. The framework, which may not necessarily be approached in a linear fashion, has three major components: identifying existing resilience factors, enhancing and sustaining these and delivering resilient communities. However, there is need to test the utility of the framework in practice.

Building institutional capacity to prevent, prepare and respond to disasters is among aspects emphasized in the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005‐2015 to enhance the resilience of disaster‐affected communities. Lessons from past programmes could help the design and implementation of future capacity building interventions with a view to making them both a means and an end in themselves in building disaster resilience of communities and nations. This paper aims to explore the issues.

The paper is based on the authors' experiences and reports in institutional capacity building in Ethiopia.

Institutional capacity building programmes should adopt a non‐intervention approach, using existing structures. Programmes should be demand‐driven and beneficiary‐based rather than supply‐driven and should be holistic and integrated with coordination being an important ingredient. Capacity building is a slow process and unless all partners are willing to make a choice in favour of assessing and working the holistic and integrated capacity building will struggle to make a lasting influence in reducing disasters and their impacts to Ethiopians.

With capacity building being at the centre of the building community, resilience, coordination by donors as well as government agencies is fundamental.

The paper illuminates areas of good practice as well as complexities surrounding the delivery of the disaster resilience through capacity building and how governments and development and humanitarian agencies are implicated.

The purpose of this paper is to review existing literature at the intersection of resilience and entrepreneurship. It identifies six scholarly conversations, each of which draws on distinct notions of resilience and entrepreneurship. Based on those conversations, shortcomings in the existing literature are discussed and avenues for future research are outlined.

A systematic multi-disciplinary review of 144 papers that are categorized into six scholarly conversations to build the foundation for a critical discussion of each line of inquiry.

This paper identifies six conversations or research streams at the intersection of entrepreneurship and resilience: resilience as traits or characteristics of entrepreneurial firms or individuals, resilience as a trigger for entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial behavior as enhancing organizational resilience, entrepreneurial firms fostering macro-level (regions, communities, economies) resilience, resilience in the context of entrepreneurial failure, and resilience as a process of recovery and transformation. The review revealed these publications imprecisely define constructs and use a limited amount of the extant scholarship on both entrepreneurship and resilience. Future research should take a more holistic approach to explore entrepreneurship and resilience from a multi-level and longitudinal perspective, especially in the context of socio-ecological sustainability.

This paper incorporates insights on resilience and entrepreneurship across academic disciplines to show how future contributions could benefit by incorporating research from other fields. In doing so, it provides a starting point for more nuanced discussions around the interrelationships between the different conversations and the role entrepreneurs can play in promoting a positive, long-term trajectory for a socio-ecological system.

This research, grounded in the conservation of resources (COR) theory, investigates the impact of supervisor incivility on emotional exhaustion and nurses’ job neglect. It also examines the buffering roles of resilience and professional calling in shaping the relationship between supervisor incivility and emotional exhaustion, as well as between emotional exhaustion and nurses’ job neglect.

The study uses multisource and time lag data from registered nurses (N = 426) using self-administered questionnaires. At time T1, nurses self-report about resilience, supervisor incivility, emotional exhaustion and professional calling. At time T2, they rate each other’s job neglect in pairs (N = 213).

The findings indicate a significant positive relationship between supervisor incivility and nurses’ job neglect partially mediated by emotional exhaustion. Additionally, resilience and professional calling function as strong buffers, mitigating the effects of supervisor incivility on emotional exhaustion and job neglect, respectively.

The contribution of the study lies in its exploration of the underlying COR, thus connecting supervisor incivility to job neglect among nurses, offering valuable insights into the mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating effects of resilience and professional calling. These findings extend the theoretical understanding of workplace incivility and provide actionable implications for fostering supportive environments in healthcare settings. However, the reliance on convenience sampling and a relatively small sample size (N = 426) limits the generalizability of the results. Future research should address these limitations by employing larger, more diverse samples to validate and expand upon these findings.

The study offers practical implications for healthcare organizations by highlighting the need to address supervisor incivility through training programs, resilience-building initiatives and fostering a sense of professional calling among nurses. These interventions can mitigate emotional exhaustion, reduce job neglect and promote a supportive work environment, ultimately enhancing nurse well-being and patient care quality.

This study from the perspective of COR theory contributes uniquely to the literature by bridging gaps in understanding how supervisor incivility impacts nurses’ job neglect via emotional exhaustion which remained a relatively underexplored area. It also advances knowledge by introducing resilience and professional calling as moderators, providing a comprehensive framework for addressing the adverse effects of workplace incivility in the healthcare sector.

This intentionally short paper considers the wide range of interpretations of “vulnerability” since its 1979 adoption in disaster studies and proposes some necessary separation and re-categorisation of its current applications.

The short history of the use of “vulnerability” in disasters studies is examined, contrasting present day contexts with those of its earliest use.

“Vulnerability” is retained for its conventional place-based role, whilst superimposed social and political constraints are allocated to “susceptibility”, a term often used to define “vulnerability”; the two terms taking on equal mutually supportive roles. Separation of the two terms is supported by on example of their realities in war and post-war conditions, together with other examples not in contexts of war. Separation of terms suggests the issue of whether manifestation of vulnerability brings about additional personal susceptibility.

Implications are that both vulnerability and susceptibility may become better understood in disaster studies and its applications in the field.

The media is seen as a possible eventual target for a published version of this short paper so that, in time, public as well as academic readership may be reached.

Dissatisfaction occasionally expressed regarding uses of “vulnerability” has, so far, received little radical attention.

This study aimed to understand adolescents’ experiences, negative feelings and coping mechanisms associated with the major disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to develop a baseline for understanding adolescents and their environment to assist future developments of technological and other solutions to mitigate adolescents’ loneliness, improve their wellbeing and strengthen their resilience.

The data about adolescents’ experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic was collected through virtual interviews conducted via Zoom. A total of 39 adolescents (aged 12 through 18 years) primarily from the North East of the USA participated in the study. The transcripts of the interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis.

This study found evidence of negative disruptions to adolescents’ social, learning and emotional routines. This study also found that in dealing with the effects of COVID-19 disruption, most of the participants exhibited five key attributes of individual resilience, including social competence, problem-solving, critical consciousness, autonomy and a sense of purpose. External factors supporting resilience were also mentioned, including technology resources, family, school and broader community.

This study relied on first-hand adolescents’ reports of their experiences, feelings and coping strategies during the pandemic. This study applied a resilience framework to interpret the findings and translate them into recommendations for further development of support systems for adolescents.