The concept of “resilience” is ubiquitous in global governance, extending from climate and ecological issues to practically all spheres of human endeavor. However, post‐pandemic discourses suggest that the concept may no longer be capable of synthesizing diverse and diverging geopolitical interests into common policy goals. Responding to what we see as an emerging “crisis of resilience,” we reconsider the utility of the concept and advance “irresilience” as its critical relational “other.” We argue that to make resilience meaningful in a “polycrisis,” it is necessary to think about it dialectically and consider how it is undermined by the very actors that evangelize it.This article is categorized under: International Policy Framework > Policy and Governance Climate, History, Society, Culture > Disciplinary Perspectives The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being

中文翻译：

---

“弹性”的局限性：关系、矛盾和重新分配


“韧性”的概念在全球治理中无处不在，从气候和生态问题延伸到人类努力的几乎所有领域。然而，大流行后的讨论表明，这一概念可能不再能够将多样化和不同的地缘政治利益综合成共同的政策目标。为了应对我们所看到的正在出现的“复原力危机”，我们重新考虑这个概念的实用性，并将“不复原力”作为其关键的关系“他者”。我们认为，为了使韧性在“多重危机”中变得有意义，有必要辩证地思考它，并考虑它是如何被传播它的参与者所破坏的。本文分类如下：国际政策框架 > 政策和治理气候、历史、社会、文化> 学科观点气候变化知识的社会地位>知识与实践气候与发展 > 可持续性与人类福祉