Critical Review
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]
Critical Review
The article focuses on analyzing the concepts of resilience and sustainability based on the similarities and differences in the environmental management system ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"AJIW48Cs","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":513,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"itemData":{"id":513,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In recent years there have been many disparate uses of the terms sustainability and resilience, with some framing sustainability and resilience as the same concept, and others claiming them to be entirely different and unrelated. To investigate similarities, differences, and current management frameworks for increasing sustainability and resilience, a literature review was undertaken that focused on integrated use of sustainability and resilience in an environmental management context. Sustainability was defined through the triple bottom line of environmental, social and economic system considerations. Resilience was viewed as the ability of a system to prepare for threats, absorb impacts, recover and adapt following persistent stress or a disruptive event. Three generalized management frameworks for organizing sustainability and resilience were found to dominate the literature: (1) resilience as a component of sustainability, (2) sustainability as a component of resilience, and (3) resilience and sustainability as separate objectives. Implementations of these frameworks were found to have common goals of providing benefits to people and the environment under normal and extreme operating conditions, with the best examples building on similarities and minimizing conflicts between resilience and sustainability.","container-title":"Science of The Total Environment","DOI":"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086","ISSN":"0048-9697","journalAbbreviation":"Science of The Total Environment","language":"en","page":"1275-1283","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications","title-short":"Resilience and sustainability","volume":"613-614","author":[{"family":"Marchese","given":"Dayton"},{"family":"Reynolds","given":"Erin"},{"family":"Bates","given":"Matthew E."},{"family":"Morgan","given":"Heather"},{"family":"Clark","given":"Susan Spierre"},{"family":"Linkov","given":"Igor"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",2,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Marchese et al., 2018). There has been a debate on the concepts of resilience and sustainability for many years. Some people characterize both concepts as a single entity while others claim them to be significantly unrelated. To analyze the similarities and differences between the different concepts, the author did an extensive review of literature that promoted the integrated use of resilience and sustainability in the context of environmental management ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"DnYV2Fjr","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":513,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"itemData":{"id":513,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In recent years there have been many disparate uses of the terms sustainability and resilience, with some framing sustainability and resilience as the same concept, and others claiming them to be entirely different and unrelated. To investigate similarities, differences, and current management frameworks for increasing sustainability and resilience, a literature review was undertaken that focused on integrated use of sustainability and resilience in an environmental management context. Sustainability was defined through the triple bottom line of environmental, social and economic system considerations. Resilience was viewed as the ability of a system to prepare for threats, absorb impacts, recover and adapt following persistent stress or a disruptive event. Three generalized management frameworks for organizing sustainability and resilience were found to dominate the literature: (1) resilience as a component of sustainability, (2) sustainability as a component of resilience, and (3) resilience and sustainability as separate objectives. Implementations of these frameworks were found to have common goals of providing benefits to people and the environment under normal and extreme operating conditions, with the best examples building on similarities and minimizing conflicts between resilience and sustainability.","container-title":"Science of The Total Environment","DOI":"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086","ISSN":"0048-9697","journalAbbreviation":"Science of The Total Environment","language":"en","page":"1275-1283","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications","title-short":"Resilience and sustainability","volume":"613-614","author":[{"family":"Marchese","given":"Dayton"},{"family":"Reynolds","given":"Erin"},{"family":"Bates","given":"Matthew E."},{"family":"Morgan","given":"Heather"},{"family":"Clark","given":"Susan Spierre"},{"family":"Linkov","given":"Igor"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",2,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Marchese et al., 2018). The first author tries to give the basic idea of both concepts and how they are perceived as similar or different in various systems. Sustainability is defined as a component of a system that ensures a better quality of life for present and future generations in the environmental, economic, and social context while resilience is characterized as an ability of a system to cope with the extreme turbulence and pressure. He proves his claims by giving evidence from the various studies according to which both concepts are classified as similar because both are the components of the system with the sole purpose of developing improvements in any particular system. Concepts are characterized as a separate entity due to their focus on the temporal and spatial grounds. Sustainability focuses on the broader scale of time frame and place as compared to the resilience.
To see the integrated effect of both concepts, the literature review showed dominance in the three frameworks: resilience characterized as a feature of sustainability, sustainability characterized as a feature of resilience and sustainability, and resilience characterized as distinct aims ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"x7Mpto8Y","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":513,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"itemData":{"id":513,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In recent years there have been many disparate uses of the terms sustainability and resilience, with some framing sustainability and resilience as the same concept, and others claiming them to be entirely different and unrelated. To investigate similarities, differences, and current management frameworks for increasing sustainability and resilience, a literature review was undertaken that focused on integrated use of sustainability and resilience in an environmental management context. Sustainability was defined through the triple bottom line of environmental, social and economic system considerations. Resilience was viewed as the ability of a system to prepare for threats, absorb impacts, recover and adapt following persistent stress or a disruptive event. Three generalized management frameworks for organizing sustainability and resilience were found to dominate the literature: (1) resilience as a component of sustainability, (2) sustainability as a component of resilience, and (3) resilience and sustainability as separate objectives. Implementations of these frameworks were found to have common goals of providing benefits to people and the environment under normal and extreme operating conditions, with the best examples building on similarities and minimizing conflicts between resilience and sustainability.","container-title":"Science of The Total Environment","DOI":"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086","ISSN":"0048-9697","journalAbbreviation":"Science of The Total Environment","language":"en","page":"1275-1283","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications","title-short":"Resilience and sustainability","volume":"613-614","author":[{"family":"Marchese","given":"Dayton"},{"family":"Reynolds","given":"Erin"},{"family":"Bates","given":"Matthew E."},{"family":"Morgan","given":"Heather"},{"family":"Clark","given":"Susan Spierre"},{"family":"Linkov","given":"Igor"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",2,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Marchese et al., 2018). These three frameworks suggest how both concepts are viewed as similar or distinct concepts. The first framework focuses on the institutional context by making resilience an integral part of the already established principles of sustainability. The second recognizes sustainability as an integrated component of resilience according to which it is believed that sustainability of a system will render the system more resilient, and the third framework is centered on the objective-oriented approach according to which both are independent of each other ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"FpXy4yLJ","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":513,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"itemData":{"id":513,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In recent years there have been many disparate uses of the terms sustainability and resilience, with some framing sustainability and resilience as the same concept, and others claiming them to be entirely different and unrelated. To investigate similarities, differences, and current management frameworks for increasing sustainability and resilience, a literature review was undertaken that focused on integrated use of sustainability and resilience in an environmental management context. Sustainability was defined through the triple bottom line of environmental, social and economic system considerations. Resilience was viewed as the ability of a system to prepare for threats, absorb impacts, recover and adapt following persistent stress or a disruptive event. Three generalized management frameworks for organizing sustainability and resilience were found to dominate the literature: (1) resilience as a component of sustainability, (2) sustainability as a component of resilience, and (3) resilience and sustainability as separate objectives. Implementations of these frameworks were found to have common goals of providing benefits to people and the environment under normal and extreme operating conditions, with the best examples building on similarities and minimizing conflicts between resilience and sustainability.","container-title":"Science of The Total Environment","DOI":"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086","ISSN":"0048-9697","journalAbbreviation":"Science of The Total Environment","language":"en","page":"1275-1283","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications","title-short":"Resilience and sustainability","volume":"613-614","author":[{"family":"Marchese","given":"Dayton"},{"family":"Reynolds","given":"Erin"},{"family":"Bates","given":"Matthew E."},{"family":"Morgan","given":"Heather"},{"family":"Clark","given":"Susan Spierre"},{"family":"Linkov","given":"Igor"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",2,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Marchese et al., 2018). The author concludes that because of these distinct lenses, similarities and differences between the concepts are partially dependent on the approach adopted to improve the social, economic and environmental systems ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"W6gUNgaB","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Marchese et al., 2018)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":513,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/CKNkWnK9/items/FEAGYYR2"],"itemData":{"id":513,"type":"article-journal","abstract":"In recent years there have been many disparate uses of the terms sustainability and resilience, with some framing sustainability and resilience as the same concept, and others claiming them to be entirely different and unrelated. To investigate similarities, differences, and current management frameworks for increasing sustainability and resilience, a literature review was undertaken that focused on integrated use of sustainability and resilience in an environmental management context. Sustainability was defined through the triple bottom line of environmental, social and economic system considerations. Resilience was viewed as the ability of a system to prepare for threats, absorb impacts, recover and adapt following persistent stress or a disruptive event. Three generalized management frameworks for organizing sustainability and resilience were found to dominate the literature: (1) resilience as a component of sustainability, (2) sustainability as a component of resilience, and (3) resilience and sustainability as separate objectives. Implementations of these frameworks were found to have common goals of providing benefits to people and the environment under normal and extreme operating conditions, with the best examples building on similarities and minimizing conflicts between resilience and sustainability.","container-title":"Science of The Total Environment","DOI":"10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086","ISSN":"0048-9697","journalAbbreviation":"Science of The Total Environment","language":"en","page":"1275-1283","source":"ScienceDirect","title":"Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications","title-short":"Resilience and sustainability","volume":"613-614","author":[{"family":"Marchese","given":"Dayton"},{"family":"Reynolds","given":"Erin"},{"family":"Bates","given":"Matthew E."},{"family":"Morgan","given":"Heather"},{"family":"Clark","given":"Susan Spierre"},{"family":"Linkov","given":"Igor"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018",2,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Marchese et al., 2018).
According to my point of view, the author has done a great job of justifying the notion of sustainability and resilience in systems. The difference and similarities between the two concepts have shown to affect the economic, social, and environmental systems in few ways that cannot be neglected. This article analyses different practical methods to implement resilience and sustainability despite the similarities and differences between the two concepts. By taking account of the various applications, the author has suggested a way for the joint integration of sustainability and resilience that will govern the effectiveness of the management programs. This will not only help in improving the management programs but also help to reduce the conflict between the concepts by promoting collaborations.
However, the article lacks in few aspects considering the absence of evidence from the grey literature and policy documents. It also lacked a comprehensive analysis from the socio-cultural perspective that is why it is perceived differently in diverse social classes. It is also established in the studies, that North and South might have a difference in perspective because of the sociopolitical irregularities, however, the article lacked in giving a detailed analysis from that point of view.
References
ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Marchese, D., Reynolds, E., Bates, M. E., Morgan, H., Clark, S. S., & Linkov, I. (2018). Resilience and sustainability: Similarities and differences in environmental management applications. Science of The Total Environment, 613–614, 1275–1283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.086