|
Abstract:
|
"The objective of this paper is to use the concept of resilience as an analytical approach in furthering the understanding of livelihoods, specifically considering the dynamics of how people make a living, and the various characteristics of complex adaptive systems, in particular scale and uncertainty. We are interested in the usefulness of resilience thinking in understanding livelihood challenges and how people deal with them. Are there any strategies at the household, community or national level that might enhance rural livelihoods? The analysis highlights those livelihood strategies that fishers consider to be critical for enhancing their well-being. Here we do not attempt a critique of resilience thinking and its assumptions as they pertain to a social science field such as livelihoods and development. In particular, we do not address to any extent the political issue of 'for what and for whom we are trying to promote resilience?' as this has been done elsewhere (Armitage and Johnson 2006). But we do acknowledge the crucial importance of contextual factors in a given case.
"After an explanation of the study area and methods, we present an overview of the stresses and shocks found in the two Cambodian fishing communities. This overview includes an examination of livelihood diversification as a coping strategy and potentially an adaptive strategy. Resilience-building strategies observed at various levels (in particular, the household and community level) are then explored, with specific attention to three clusters of strategies (adapted from Folke et al. 2003; Berkes and Seixas 2005): learning to live with change and uncertainty; nurturing learning and adapting; and creating opportunities for self- organization. In the last section, notions of well-being are examined from a community perspective, as a way of providing a 'surrogate' (Carpenter et al. 2005) for resilience."
|