What is Resilience?

Adaptation and Resilience
, ,
1

We hear the word resilience a lot when talking about climate change and adaptation, but what does it mean? At its core, resilience is all about how well we—whether as individuals, communities, or entire ecosystems—deal with challenges, adapt to change, and come out stronger on the other side. It’s not just about bouncing back to where we were before but also learning, evolving, and becoming better prepared for whatever comes next.

When it comes to climate change, resilience means figuring out how to handle things like extreme weather, rising temperatures, and shifting landscapes. It’s about finding creative solutions—whether that’s through better infrastructure, community-driven action, or nature-based approaches—to keep our systems running and thriving despite the pressures we’re facing.

So, what does resilience mean to you?

  • What is a definition of resilience we can agree on?
  • How do we know if a community or system is truly resilient?
  • What are some challenges you’ve seen when trying to build resilience?
  • How can we plan for long-term resilience while still addressing immediate needs?
  • Have you seen or been part of any inspiring resilience efforts?
1 Like
2

Thanks for raising these important questions!

Resilience, to me, is the ability of a system - whether it’s a community, an ecosystem, or an infrastructure network - to withstand shocks and stresses. I tend to think of resilience in relative terms: a system with higher resilience can either absorb a more intense shock without significant disruption or recover faster than one with lower resilience.

But resilience isn’t just about returning to a previous state - it’s also about adapting and evolving. A truly resilient system learns from disturbances, improves its capacity to handle future challenges, and even transforms when necessary. This is especially critical in the context of climate change, where past conditions may no longer be a reliable baseline for the future.

Measuring resilience can be tricky, though. Do we define it by how quickly a system recovers? By how much damage it avoids? By its ability to maintain core functions despite ongoing stress?

One of the biggest challenges seen in building resilience is that it requires long-term planning and investment, but immediate needs often take priority. Balancing both is difficult, especially when resources are limited or when external pressures push for short-term fixes over sustainable solutions.

In recent times, I’ve seen various communities and cities developing their climate resilience roadmaps. One inspiring initiative that comes to mind is the Indigenous Clean Energy Network in Canada. This initiative supports Indigenous communities in accelerating their participation in clean energy projects, reducing reliance on fossil fuels, and increasing energy security.

By shifting towards renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydro, these communities not only lower their emissions but also become less vulnerable to fuel supply disruptions, which are often exacerbated by extreme weather events. These projects create local job opportunities, enhance energy independence, and foster long-term sustainability - making them a powerful model for community-led climate action.

1 Like
3

I really appreciate your musings on how we might measure resilience—whether it’s by how quickly a system recovers, how much damage it avoids, or how well it maintains its core functions.

This got me thinking about collective intelligence—specifically, how quickly we learn to cultivate and apply it—as a key measure of a system’s resilience."

Here’s what I mean:

If we take any system—a human, a plant, an ecosystem—it can’t effectively withstand shocks, maintain core functions, or adapt without a strong foundation of learning, knowledge, and tools. In other words, resilience isn’t just about immediate responses to stress but also about how well-prepared a system is before a disturbance even happens.

For example, a baby must learn to crawl before they can walk—it’s a gradual process of adaptation. Similarly, someone recovering from a life-altering injury might take longer to adjust depending on their previous experiences and available support systems. Adaptation rates are relative—some systems thrive in one context but struggle in another due to gaps in knowledge or preparedness.

This is why monocultures are so vulnerable; they lack the diversity of encoded knowledge needed to recover from shocks. In contrast, ecosystems with biodiversity have built-in adaptability—essentially a form of resilience embedded in their genetic and structural diversity.

To me, resilience isn’t just about bouncing back; it’s about learning, growing and adapting “together” by drawing from collective intelligence. This calls for integrating different perspectives, tools, and knowledge sources to continuously adapt. The more we embrace this capacity for shared learning and flexible thinking, the better we can prepare for, respond to, and ultimately “thrive” through change.

1 Like
4

This is an interesting discussion. Thanks Animesh and Gabby for sharing your thoughts.

Resilience, to me, is about more than just enduring hardship—it’s about transformation. It’s the ability to integrate change, learn from disruption, and emerge not just intact but evolved so that we can contribute to our community in ways we were not able to before. As Animesh pointed out, resilience isn’t just about returning to a previous state; it’s about adapting and evolving in response to new realities. In the context of climate change, where past conditions are no longer reliable baselines for the future, resilience must include the capacity for both immediate adaptation and long-term systemic shifts.

A truly resilient community or system doesn’t just withstand shocks—it learns from them, incorporating collective intelligence, as Gabby highlighted, to anticipate, adapt, and innovate. Resilience isn’t just measured by how quickly we recover but by how well we build the knowledge, tools, and diversity necessary to respond effectively before a disturbance even happens. Just as biodiversity strengthens ecosystems by embedding adaptability at a structural level, human systems must foster decentralized, inclusive, and knowledge-sharing approaches to resilience.

One of the greatest challenges in building resilience, as Animesh noted, is balancing immediate needs with long-term sustainability. Too often, urgency drives reactive decision-making, leaving us vulnerable to repeating the same mistakes. Resilience must be proactive, ensuring that adaptation efforts don’t just mitigate short-term risks but also strengthen communities and ecosystems against future uncertainties.

I find inspiration in models like the Indigenous Clean Energy Network in Canada, which Animesh mentioned. By shifting toward renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydro, these communities are not only reducing emissions but also increasing their energy security and self-sufficiency—building resilience in ways that are both ecological and social.

I believe that the best resilience strategies are those that mimic nature’s intelligence—self-organizing, regenerative, and deeply interconnected. Whether in climate adaptation, community-building, or digital transformation, the key lies in fostering flexible, collaborative, and evolving systems that embrace complexity rather than trying to control it.

1 Like
5

Loving theses insights!

A few key themes are popping up:

  1. Resilience isn’t just bouncing back—it’s about adapting and evolving. It’s not about returning to “normal” but learning from challenges and shifting toward something stronger and more prepared for the future. @animesh and @jzhang99 both pointed out that past conditions aren’t a reliable baseline anymore, so resilience has to mean something more than just recovery.

  2. Learning & knowledge-sharing are key. @Gabby brought up a great point—resilience depends on how well we learn, both as individuals and as communities. A system that adapts well is one that keeps improving, just like how biodiversity helps ecosystems stay flexible in the face of change. @jzhang99 expanded on this, comparing resilience to nature’s intelligence—self-organizing, decentralized, and always evolving.

  3. Short-term needs vs. long-term resilience is a real struggle. This came up a lot—@animesh and @jzhang99 both mentioned how hard it is to invest in long-term resilience when immediate pressures demand quick fixes. It’s a tough balance but an important one.

  4. Real-world examples are inspiring. The Indigenous Clean Energy Network in Canada came up as a great example of resilience in action—shifting toward renewable energy while also strengthening communities.

This has been great so far, but I’d love to dig into a few questions we haven’t answered yet:

• How do we actually measure resilience? We’ve talked about recovery speed, damage avoidance, and maintaining core functions, but what practical ways exist to track resilience in a meaningful way?

• What other barriers make building resilience hard? Beyond balancing short- and long-term needs, are there political, cultural, financial, or structural challenges you’ve seen?

• How do we address urgent needs while still planning for long-term resilience? Any strategies or examples of this working well?

Curious to hear your thoughts! Thanks again for all the great ideas so far!

6

Sorry for the late response here! Here are my thoughts from what I’ve learned through my academics. The way I understand resilience is primarily through a disaster risk reduction (DRR) lens!

Resilience is the ability to adapt to change whether unforeseen or anticipated. It is just one piece in the climate change solutions web. This is coupled with vulnerability, mitigation, and adaptation. In order to work towards climate change resiliency, assessing vulnerability is crucial to know if a community is truly resilient. Vulnerability is the sensitivity of a community making it further susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard. By assessing a community’s vulnerability through evaluating exposure to climate change hazards, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity, can resilience measures be established and thus measured for its effectiveness. Let’s build a scenario:

A low lying coastal zone has been experiencing more floods throughout the years. The coastal communities are quite vulnerable to the impacts of flooding as they are mostly low-income households. Right away we can see that

  1. The climate change hazard is increased flooding from sea level rise, and coastal erosion
  2. The sensitivities are the coastal communities who are in the impact zone, the land itself being so close to the sea, and the homes that may either get washed away or destroyed through coastal erosion.
  3. The adaptive capacity is relatively low due to the area being populated by low-income neighbourhoods who may not have the means to retrofit their homes or relocate.

How might we tackle resilience here?

  • Call for aid for major flood events to help relocate communities
  • Government aid for building better homes to protect people and their livelihoods
  • Adding a flood barrier - dykes, barriers, etc.
  • Spreading awareness about this community’s plight
  • Educating the community on flood preparedness
  • Reducing carbon dioxide emissions
  • Providing flood insurance

The challenge is measuring resilience efforts. Many researchers have had the same concern and it is truly one of the biggest challenges about this conversation of resilience. Some researchers believe that establishing resilience indicators is the best method of measurement. In our scenario this could mean the % of the population who have received preparedness training, the % of households with flood insurance, etc. The next concern that comes up is how we may plan for long-term resilience while accounting for immediate needs. In our scenario, adding a flood barrier such as sandbags or boulders may end up being an easy short-term solution for coastal flooding, but considering the fluctuating nature of climate change and the continual erosion that could happen, a long-term solution is essential. This can include government funding for a larger dyke system, and depending on the area, planting more mangroves and reforestation as a nature-based solution. This would require proper planning and collaboration between indigenous communities, residents, the government, environmental planners and ecologists, and more. An impactful long-term term solution that can help the short-term needs is education and awareness building. Having people aware of such issues and collaborate to work together as a collective to combat climate change is one of the most effective ways to build resilience.

Information from:

Lecture notes from the University of Waterloo

1 Like
7

I had a look at the Merriam-Webster definition for “resilient” (Resilient Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster):

characterized or marked by resilience: such as
a: capable of withstanding shock without permanent deformation or rupture
b: tending to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change

The “b” definition aligns with what I’ve seen posted here so far … the idea that adaptability may be a tactic to help achieve an outcome of survival.

The “a” definition speaks to something different that I’ve been thinking about … More specifically, it’s an idea of survival without needing to adapt.

I think there may be something important here; more than just an exercise in semantics. It brings to mind this Ted Talk: David Finnigan: A controversial play — and what it taught me about the psychology of climate | TED Talk

The tldr; is that although those that deny the reality of climate change may be in denial of objective, scientific reality, they are conducting their lives true to their beliefs. On the other hand, those of us that claim to understand and believe the truth of climate science are not coming anywhere close to making the adaptations required to address what we are told by the science we claim to believe.

I think this points to the limits of our ability (or at least willingness) to adapt even when we claim to understand the imperative of adapting. If a segment of the population does not see a need to adapt, and the remaining segment doesn’t feel willing/able to adapt, then resilience premised on adaptation may not be practical.

@rik I think my thoughts speak to one of your follow-up questions, “[w]hat other barriers make building resilience hard”? To the degree that resilience is built upon adaptation, our tolerance/capacity for change will be a barrier. Maybe this is a good reminder for us to pay attention to maximizing co-benefits in our adaptation plans and discussions, and in particular to be clear about adaptations that minimize the need for future adaption?

1 Like