Daun Kauffman posted:There are many many many risks unless the author provides their explicit, personal definition as part of their writing and research (each time), as advised by the luminaries, including Luthar and Cicchetti and Garmezy and...(many times)
Context sometimes determines that. The word is bandied in Emergency Management a lot lately, but they assume too much. It's almost like they think the whole community will come together in one happy family. That is hardly the case. People who feel threatened, or have high survival needs and think the very people trying too manage them are the issue, they will not cooperate. They will then loot, and rob, and so on. It happens at every disaster. "Resilience" then begins to lose its meaning.
Resilience needs to be granular. If you don't have it individually, you certainly won't get it collectively when the needs are the highest.