Adaptive governance describes the purposeful collective actions to resist, adapt, or transform when faced with shocks. As governments are reluctant to intervene in informal settlements, community based organisations (CBOs) self-organize and take he lead. This study explores under what conditions CBOs in Mathare informal settlement, Nairobi initiate and sustain resilience activities during Covid-19. Study findings show that CBOs engage in multiple resilience activities, varying from maladaptive and unsustainable to adaptive, and transformative. Two conditions enable CBOs to initiate resilience activities: bonding within the community and coordination with other actors. To sustain these activities over 2.5 years of Covid-19, CBOs also require leadership, resources, organisational capacity, and network capacity. The same conditions appear to enable CBOs to engage in transformative activities. How-ever, CBOs cannot transform urban systems on their own. An additional condition, not met in Mathare, is that governments, NGOs, and donor agencies facilitate, support, and build community capacities. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Adaptive governance by community-based organisations: Community resilience initiatives during Covid‐19 in Mathare, Nairobi. which has been published in final form at doi/10.1002/sd.2682. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions
DOCUMENT
Since the early work on defining and analyzing resilience in domains such as engineering, ecology and psychology, the concept has gained significant traction in many fields of research and practice. It has also become a very powerful justification for various policy goals in the water sector, evident in terms like flood resilience, river resilience, and water resilience. At the same time, a substantial body of literature has developed that questions the resilience concept's systems ontology, natural science roots and alleged conservatism, and criticizes resilience thinking for not addressing power issues. In this study, we review these critiques with the aim to develop a framework for power-sensitive resilience analysis. We build on the three faces of power to conceptualize the power to define resilience. We structure our discussion of the relevant literature into five questions that need to be reflected upon when applying the resilience concept to social–hydrological systems. These questions address: (a) resilience of what, (b) resilience at what scale, (c) resilience to what, (d) resilience for what purpose, and (e) resilience for whom; and the implications of the political choices involved in defining these parameters for resilience building or analysis. Explicitly considering these questions enables making political choices explicit in order to support negotiation or contestation on how resilience is defined and used.
MULTIFILE
Sustainable business models are all the craze right now. Firms are making many claims that their activities create social and environmental value. The realization has finally sunk in that business has a fundamental role to play in addressing the net-zero challenge and the sustainable development goals. John Browne, who in 1997 was the first CEO of an oil major to break ranks with his industry peers on climate change denial, recently repeated in the Financial Times that ‘business can be a force for change on climate’.However, looking at these sustainable business models shows that the value firms promise to create can be quite limited. The majority focuses on cleaning up their own act but fails to assess how their business models are making a difference in tackling climate change, biodiversity loss, or global inequality at a societal level. In our latest publication in Business and Society – Dentoni, Pinkse and Lubberink (2021) –, we argue that there is a need for firms to start organizing their business models in such a way that they support the resilience of the socio-ecological systems – and not just improve their own sustainability performance.
LINK
The Dutch main water systems face pressing environmental, economic and societal challenges due to climatic changes and increased human pressure. There is a growing awareness that nature-based solutions (NBS) provide cost-effective solutions that simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic benefits and help building resilience. In spite of being carefully designed and tested, many projects tend to fail along the way or never get implemented in the first place, wasting resources and undermining trust and confidence of practitioners in NBS. Why do so many projects lose momentum even after a proof of concept is delivered? Usually, failure can be attributed to a combination of eroding political will, societal opposition and economic uncertainties. While ecological and geological processes are often well understood, there is almost no understanding around societal and economic processes related to NBS. Therefore, there is an urgent need to carefully evaluate the societal, economic, and ecological impacts and to identify design principles fostering societal support and economic viability of NBS. We address these critical knowledge gaps in this research proposal, using the largest river restoration project of the Netherlands, the Border Meuse (Grensmaas), as a Living Lab. With a transdisciplinary consortium, stakeholders have a key role a recipient and provider of information, where the broader public is involved through citizen science. Our research is scientifically innovative by using mixed methods, combining novel qualitative methods (e.g. continuous participatory narrative inquiry) and quantitative methods (e.g. economic choice experiments to elicit tradeoffs and risk preferences, agent-based modeling). The ultimate aim is to create an integral learning environment (workbench) as a decision support tool for NBS. The workbench gathers data, prepares and verifies data sets, to help stakeholders (companies, government agencies, NGOs) to quantify impacts and visualize tradeoffs of decisions regarding NBS.
Restoring rivers with an integrated approach that combines water safety, nature development and gravel mining remains a challenge. Also for the Grensmaas, the most southern trajectory of the Dutch main river Maas, that crosses the border with Belgium in the south of Limburg. The first plans (“Plan Ooievaar”) were already developed in the 1980s and were highly innovative and controversial, as they were based on the idea of using nature-based solutions combined with social-economic development. Severe floodings in 1993 and 1995 came as a shock and accelerated the process to implement the associated measures. To address the multifunctionality of the river, the Grensmaas consortium was set up by public and private parties (the largest public-private partnership ever formed in the Netherlands) to have an effective, scalable and socially accepted project. However, despite the shared long term vision and the further development of plans during the process it was hard to satisfy all the goals in the long run. While stakeholders agreed on the long-term goal, the path towards that goal remains disputed and depends on the perceived status quo and urgency of the problem. Moreover, internal and external pressures and disturbances like climate change or the economic crisis influenced perception and economic conditions of stakeholders differently. In this research we will identify relevant system-processes connected to the implementation of nature-based solutions through the lens of social-ecological resilience. This knowledge will be used to co-create management plans that effectively improve the long-term resilience of the Dutch main water systems.
Inside Out is an innovative research project that translates cutting-edge microbiome science into immersive, multisensory experiences aimed at long-term behavioral and mental health transformation. Combining extended reality (XR), speculative gastronomy, and narrative therapy, the project enables participants to explore their inner microbiome landscape through taste, smell, touch, and interactive storytelling. This pioneering methodology connects gut-brain science with emotional and sensory engagement. Participants experience their bodies from the inside out, cultivating a visceral understanding of the symbiotic microbial worlds within us. The project includes AI-generated "drinkable memories," microbiome-inspired food designs, haptic-olfactory VR environments, and robotic interactions that choreograph the body as terrain. Developed in collaboration with designers from Polymorf, producer Studio Biarritz, psychiatrist-researcher Anja Lok, and microbiome scientists from Amsterdam UMC and the Amsterdam Microbiome Expertise Center, Inside Out bridges scientific rigor with artistic expression. The project seeks to: • Increase embodied understanding of the microbiome’s role in health and well-being • Shift public perception from hygiene-based fear to ecological thinking • Inspire behavioral change related to food, gut health, and mental resilience The outcomes are designed to reach a large audience and implementation in science museums, art-science festivals, and educational programs, with a view toward future clinical applications in preventive healthcare and mental well-being. By making the invisible microbiome tangible, Inside Out aims not only to inform, but to transform—redefining how we relate to the ecosystems within us.
