People in the Mountains - Mountain Geography: Physical and Human Dimensions - page 532

Managing change requires resilience in individuals, families, communities, and large-
scale social-ecological systems. Change comes in many forms, and we have reviewed
many examples in this chapter. Some changes are gradual, others are sudden shocks,
and all require that people and communities cope and adapt. The concept of resilience
is often used to characterize the ability to successfully anticipate, cope with, and/or ad-
apt to changes and shocks so as to enable livelihood sustainability (Berkes et al. 2003).
Many mountain people and communities in different places and times have demon-
strated resilience in the face of change in dealing with new environmental, cultural, so-
cioeconomic, political, and institutional circumstances. We see numerous examples of
this, as mountain people in many regions have successfully adjusted to the new pro-
cesses, circumstances, and livelihoods that characterize the various and changing di-
mensions of mountain resource exploitation, economic and amenity migration, tradi-
tional and new market forces, and the growing importance of tourism. Other examples
demonstrate less successful forms of resilience, the most devastating being the impact
of introduced diseases on indigenous mountain people. Most diseases are examples of
a rapid-onset hazard leading to disaster, and they often produce changes that are most
difficult to adjust to in the short term. Earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other nat-
ural hazards, as well as global economic depression, persecution, conflict, and war are
other examples of shocks that are difficult to cope with and adapt to. Building and en-
hancing resilience is an important step toward livelihood sustainability and develop-
ment in mountain areas. Vibrant leadership, empowerment and participation of all seg-
ments of society, shared goals and values, established institutions and organizations, a
stable and healthy population, a diversified economic base, constructive external part-
nerships, and local control of the availability of resources are all important ingredients
for building resilience (Folke et al. 2003).
Using resilience as a concept in assessing the impacts of disasters and hazards and in
planning for future shocks is increasingly common (Gallopin 2006; Gardner and Dekens
2007; Fuchs 2009). In traditional mountain communities, in an effort to minimize envir-
onmental risks, high levels of resilience were achieved through an optimal exploitation
of spatial and temporal niches, the avoidance or attenuation of harmful developments
and activities, a diversification or complementary utilization of agricultural crops and
practices and of diverse microenvironments, and through community reciprocity. This
worked well for certain local hazard events, but not so well for major regional hazard
events such as earthquakes, prolonged periods of drought, widespread flooding, epi-
demics, climate change, economic depression, and war. In these instances, local resili-
ence may be insufficient, and other factors such as external partnerships and linkages
with national and international organizations may become more important. Recovery,
reconstruction, and redevelopment of livelihoods in the 2005 Kashmir and 2008 Wen-
chuan earthquake disasters illustrate the point.
Through time, the resilience of mountain people and communities has probably in-
creased. However, resilience remains compromised and limited by complex terrain;
variable and extreme weather; climate change; distance and isolation; social, political,
and economic inequities; and poverty, marginality, and powerlessness.
Conclusion: Persistence and Change