Resilience Science Research Articles

Stress tests and biomarkers of resilience: Proceedings of the second state of resilience science conference.

The "Stress Tests and Biomarkers of Resilience" conference, hosted by the American Geriatrics Society and the National Institute on Aging, marks the second in a series aimed at advancing the field of resilience science. Held on March 4-5, 2024, in Bethesda, Maryland, this conference built upon the foundational work from the first conference, which focused on defining resilience across various domains-physical, cognitive, and psychosocial. This year's gathering centered around three factors: the biology that underlies resilient outcomes; the social, environmental, genetic, and psychosocial factors that impact that resilience biology; and the biomarker testing and imaging that predicts resilient outcomes for older adults. The presentations and discussions around these topics were underscored by considerations around the many impacts of social determinants of health on resiliency interventions, and by advances in the modern training and research methodologies that influence data collection and experiment design.

How can we build structural resilience? Integration of social-ecological and minority stress models.

As the United States contends with racism and a social justice reckoning, the need to advance our understanding of how to build structural resilience continues to be pressing. This article proposes a culturally and structurally informed model of resilience for individuals with minoritized identities that integrates social-ecological and minority stress models. First, common stressors and traumas experienced by minoritized individuals at multiple levels of proximal/distal influence are reviewed: microsystem (e.g., family rejection), mesosystem (e.g., community-based discrimination), exosystem (e.g., barriers to health care), macrosystem (e.g., harmful legal policies), and chronosystem (e.g., historical legacy). Next, how these exposures have cascading effects on minority stress processes (e.g., discriminatory policies in the macrosystem affect how a child is socialized in the microsystem) are considered. Then, modifiable factors (e.g., community cohesion) that promote resiliency in the face of ongoing exposures are discussed. To conclude, guidelines are offered for advancing the psychological science of resilience in minoritized groups including mixed methods to reflect participants' experiences, ecological approaches to assess resilience, and multilevel modeling to understand the interplay between the social-ecological context and individual factors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Special Issue on NIED Frontier Research on Science and Technology for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience 2024

We are pleased to publish this special issue, dedicated to the NIED Frontier Research on Science and Technology for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience 2024. The fifth NIED mid-/long-term plan period began in 2023, and this issue includes the first results of six papers, two reviews, one survey report, one note, and one material. Recently, violent natural disasters have triggered the development of effective countermeasures. Akita, Yamaguchi et al., and Hirashima et al. dealt with climate hazards such as heavy rainfall, snow, and ice disasters. Yamazaki-Honda reported the progress and challenges of disaster reduction and climate change adaptation using DRR strategies. Yadab et al., Akita, and Naito et al. reported data analysis and suggestions to evaluate seismic and volcanic hazards. Nagata et al. proposed the ICT tool “YOU@RISK” to educate regarding volcanic disaster risks. Sato et al. emphasized the importance and effectiveness of information technology. Kimura et al. emphasized preparedness and elaborated on measures to improve preparedness for all natural hazards. These new outcomes will promote the development of a sustainable society against these hazards and will be flagships to proceed with NIED research projects.

Advancing the science of adverse childhood experiences and resilience: A case for global and ecological perspectives

Research on adverse childhood experiences and resilience (the process of overcoming trauma) has been dominated by studies originating in wealthy democracies of the global north. We call for more global and ecological approaches not only for documenting the true global burden of childhood adversity, but also for advancing the science of resilience and understanding pathways to overcoming trauma. We identify several forms of trauma that need better consideration in prevalence estimates, including state, political, and institutional violence, crisis migration, climate change and related natural disasters, and global health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We also need more nuanced analyses of culture and place and to recognize that the global south and global north are not monolithic concepts. We offer illustrative examples of how more global, ecological approaches can enhance our understanding of pathways to overcoming even high dosages of childhood adversity. One of the key insights of ACEs research, the dose-response relationship between trauma burden and outcomes, has been extended to research on resilience. Concepts that capture the total “dose” of positive assets and resources (people's resilience portfolios) are showing how people might overcome even high doses of trauma. This work can become more global by including incorporating strengths and healing processes common in collectivist, versus individualistic, cultures. It can become more ecological by recognizing that physical environments—both natural and human-made built aspects—play key roles in resilience. Recognizing the intersectionality among these elements can take us to the next generation of trauma and resilience science.

The role of science in resilience planning for military-civilian domains in the U.S. and NATO

ABSTRACT In recent years, the NATO member nations have committed to a coordinated approach to strengthening resilience among the Allies, including the development of National Resilience Plans (NRPs). The Allies outlined the extent to which the robustness of their respective military capacities requires the designed resilience of systems that bridge civilian and military domains. This article outlines the role that resilience plays in supporting tactical and strategic measures of national security and defense within military and civilian domains. This exploration provides an outline of how resilience is currently applied in practice by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) and NATO. Building on this diversity of applications, various categorical forms of resilience drawn from the empirical science of resilience are positioned within NATO’s emerging frame for ‘layered’ resilience. This article reinforces the scientific debate that an optimal orientation to resilience leaves open the door for the transformative adaptation of function and identity when the single-equilibrium processes of resilience reach their limits. This article concludes with a normative perspective on how military and civilian resilience planning could support the development of NRPs that would amplify the Allies’ collective capacity to face shared security threats.

"WISER" intervention to reduce healthcare worker burnout - 1 year follow up.

Test sustainability of Web-based Implementation for the Science of Enhancing Resilience (WISER) intervention efficacy in reducing healthcare worker (HCW) emotional exhaustion (EE), a key component of burnout. One-year follow-up of WISER RCT using two cohorts (one waitlist control with shortened intervention period) of HCWs of four NICUs each, to improve HCW well-being (primary outcome: EE). In Cohorts 1 and 2, 194 and 312 WISER initiators were identified by 1-year, and 99 and 80 completed 1-year follow-up, respectively. Combined cohort results showed that relative to baseline, at 1-year WISER decreased EE (-7.07 (95%CI: -10.22, -3.92), p < 0.001), depression (-4.49 (-6.81, -2.16), p = <0.001), and improved work-life integration (6.08 (4.25, 7.90), p = <0.001). EE continued to decline between 6-month and 1-year follow-up (p = 0.022). The percentage of HCWs reporting concerning outcomes was significantly decreased for EE (-10.9% (95%CI: -17.9%, -4.9%); p < 0.001), and secondary outcomes depression and work-life integration. WISER improves HCW well-being for at least 1 year. NCT02603133; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02603133.

Ecosystem Resilience Monitoring and Early Warning Using Earth Observation Data: Challenges and Outlook

AbstractAs the Earth system is exposed to large anthropogenic interferences, it becomes ever more important to assess the resilience of natural systems, i.e., their ability to recover from natural and human-induced perturbations. Several, often related, measures of resilience have been proposed and applied to modeled and observed data, often by different scientific communities. Focusing on terrestrial ecosystems as a key component of the Earth system, we review methods that can detect large perturbations (temporary excursions from a reference state as well as abrupt shifts to a new reference state) in spatio-temporal datasets, estimate the recovery rate after such perturbations, or assess resilience changes indirectly from stationary time series via indicators of critical slowing down. We present here a sequence of ideal methodological steps in the field of resilience science, and argue how to obtain a consistent and multi-faceted view on ecosystem or climate resilience from Earth observation (EO) data. While EO data offers unique potential to study ecosystem resilience globally at high spatial and temporal scale, we emphasize some important limitations, which are associated with the theoretical assumptions behind diagnostic methods and with the measurement process and pre-processing steps of EO data. The latter class of limitations include gaps in time series, the disparity of scales, and issues arising from aggregating time series from multiple sensors. Based on this assessment, we formulate specific recommendations to the EO community in order to improve the observational basis for ecosystem resilience research.

Social impact: Trusting open science for future pandemic resilience

In response to the pressing need to improve epidemic preparedness, this paper presents the development and application of EPISOS, a project designed to improve the timeliness, completeness, and accessibility of epidemiological data. Through EPISOS, we have created a dynamic, cross-sectoral collaborative framework that supports the detection, monitoring, and risk assessment of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases across Europe. This initiative not only addresses the challenges of standardizing data quality and resource availability, but also promotes equity in data access and use. The paper critically analyzes the difficulties encountered in these areas and outlines effective strategies for leveraging open science to strengthen public health responses. Integrating real-world examples, we illustrate the practical impact and potential of EPISOS in promoting scientific collaboration and transparency during health crises.

Emergence and evolution of developmental resilience science over half a century.

This reflection on the history and future of developmental resilience science (DRS) highlights its co-emergence with developmental psychopathology (DP), as well as the roles of this journal and its founding editor, Dante Cicchetti, in the evolution of these intertwined domains of scholarship. A remarkable constellation of scholars at the University of Minnesota shaped the course of both conceptual frameworks and their dissemination. I describe fundamental assumptions common to DP and DRS frameworks that reflect their common roots and the pervasive influence of systems theory on developmental science. I describe four waves of DRS and key principles of DRS at the present time. In conclusion, I consider the possibility that a fifth wave of DRS is emerging with a focus on understanding patterns of multisystem, multilevel processes of resilience and their implications for interventions in the context of interacting, interdependent, and complex adaptive systems. I close this commentary with questions for future research and a hopeful outlook on the future of human resilience.

The 22&lt;sup&gt;nd &lt;/sup&gt; Science Council of Asia (SCA) Conference “Science for Sustainability, Resilience, and Human Well-being” October 19-21, 2023, Seoul, Korea

The 22&lt;sup&gt;nd &lt;/sup&gt; Science Council of Asia (SCA) Conference “Science for Sustainability, Resilience, and Human Well-being” October 19-21, 2023, Seoul, Korea

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING AND PHYSICAL HEALTH IN THE CONTEXT OF OUR RAPIDLY AGING WORLD

Abstract Our society is rapidly aging. Thus, citizens, researchers, and policymakers alike are seeking ways to re-engineer society to achieve the dual aim of helping our aging population age well and fostering new ways for older adults to deploy the abundance of strengths that accrue with age. Most public health, biomedical, and psychological efforts have focused on reducing harmful risk factors. This approach has contributed greatly to prevention and treatment programs. However, another approach to achieving this dual aim is to expand the focus and evaluate upstream dimensions of psychosocial well-being. This approach might help inform the multidisciplinary and multi-level response efforts we need. In this talk, I will describe a theoretical model, results from a series of studies evaluating associations between a sense of purpose with reduced risk of chronic conditions, and mechanistic biobehavioral processes underlying these associations. This work aims to provide new directions for building a science of resilience and providing new targets for multi-level interventions that we can weave into our daily lives via practices and systems.

A Comprehensive Review on Integrating Climate Science and Machine Learning for Power System Resilience

This study focuses on how climate science and machine learning techniques may be used to improve power system resilience in the face of climate change. It emphasizes the significance of resilience and the principles of machine learning application in power systems. Predictive models for climate-related disruptions are among the most recent advances in merging climate research with machine learning. The review assesses the efficacy of various models in improving system resilience and their limitations and problems. Future research prospects, policy consequences, and recommendations for moving climate science and machine learning integration forward for power system resilience are highlighted. Overall, the need to integrate these technologies to address climate change concerns and improve power system resilience is emphasized in this analysis.

Resilience science: Theoretical and methodological directions from the juncture of resilience and projects

Increasing concerns about disruptions and the need for adaptation to drastic changes in social and ecological systems is reflected in the growing interest in resilience science. At the same time, the surge in medium to large scale projects around the world, known as projectification of societies, has resulted in considerable interest in the discipline of project studies. The disciplinary idiosyncrasies of project studies motivate a reflection on theoretical and methodological considerations in resilience science. This reflection rests on the experience of instigating research at the juncture of resilience and projects in this special collection. Specifically, we framed these observations as a set of principles that can inform resilience science, including the need for theoretical parsimony, deliberate attention to system boundaries in conceptualization of resilience, as well as critical considerations in measuring resilience. We posit that in its essence, project studies has to navigate a paradox through: (i) investigating projects as efficient form of organizing for a resilient, sustainable and just future, while (ii) unpacking the governance and accountability limitations of temporary organizing within projects that aim to ensure these long-term goals. The proposed principles are core to the broader research stream that we call “projects of future,” a collective inquiry to unpack these paradoxes and a research stream to engage project scholarship with the contemporary phenomena in Anthropocene.

The Indigenous Connectedness Framework for Understanding the Causes, Consequences, and Solutions to Substance Misuse in Indigenous Children's Development.

Research in Indigenous communities continues to lead innovations in the adversity and resilience sciences. These innovations highlight the strengths of Indigenous communities and are an act of resistance against prevailing stereotypes that Indigenous communities are vulnerable and wholly restrained by health deficits. The aim of this Supplemental Issue on Substance Misuse and Disorder and American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian Children's Development: Understanding Root Causes and Lifting up Solutions Grounded in Indigenous Community Strengths is to highlight the promising new approaches and perspectives implemented by a group of engaged researchers and their community partners, as they seek to move resilience science research forward. Case studies presented in this issue are from projects led by teams connected to the Native Children's Research Exchange (NCRE) conference, all of whom conduct health promotion and disease prevention research among American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. Sparked by several major exogenous shocks to the current landscape of the American milieu, namely, the COVID-19 pandemic, the murder of George Floyd (increased visibility of overt racism in the USA), and climate change, this article presents a model for conducting research with Indigenous Communities that acknowledges these forces while highlighting community strengths.

Special Issue on NIED Frontier Research on Science and Technology for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience 2023

We are very pleased to publish this Special Issue, NIED Frontier Research on Science and Technology for Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience 2023, which includes three papers and one tutorial. The first paper, authored by Dhakal and Kunugi, presents the orientation changes that earthquake movements have caused in the accelerometers of a seafloor observation network for earthquakes and tsunamis along the Japan Trench (S-net). This study is expected to contribute to more accurate analyses of S-net data. The second and third papers are reports of research done on volcanoes. The paper by Tanada and Ueda presents the seismic activity of the Nasudake volcano through the use of NIED hypocenter data gathered from 1998 to 2022. Tanada and Ueda state that earthquakes have regularly occurred near the Chausudake lava dome and two craters and that, from the volcano disaster-prevention point of view, it is important to monitor the relationship between this seismic area and volcanic activity. The third paper, by Miyagi et al., reports on an experiment aimed at grasping the movement of climbers and sharing the level of disaster threat with climber-related organizations in real time. Their online visualization system for the movement of climbers helps to provide solutions to problems related to volcanic disaster prevention not only during disaster events but also in the periods between. The last paper is a tutorial by Hanashima and Usuda on “SIP4D-ZIP,” which is a standard for synthesizing and sharing common information from multiple organizations. This tutorial explains how to realize a versatile and automatic mutual data sharing and usage system for various kinds of necessary disaster information. In conjunction with the fourth 7-year mid/long term plan period 2016-2022, NIED has published seven special issues since 2017, including this 2023 issue. We believe that the articles in these seven issues can contribute to the advancement of science and technology for disaster risk reduction and resilience.

The emergence of convergence

Science is increasingly a collaborative pursuit. Although the modern scientific enterprise owes much to individuals working at the core of their field, humanity is increasingly confronted by highly complex problems that require the integration of a variety of disciplinary and methodological expertise. In 2016, the U.S. National Science Foundation launched an initiative prioritizing support for convergence research as a means of “solving vexing research problems, in particular, complex problems focusing on societal needs.” We discuss our understanding of the objectives of convergence research and describe in detail the conditions and processes likely to generate successful convergence research. We use our recent experience as participants in a convergence workshop series focused on resilience in the Arctic to highlight key points. The emergence of resilience science over the past 50 years is presented as a successful contemporary example of the emergence of convergence. We close by describing some of the challenges to the development of convergence research, such as timescales and discounting the future, appropriate metrics of success, allocation issues, and funding agency requirements.

A dynamic, multilevel approach to conceptualising and designing resilience research in the context of military stress.

Challenges in conceptualising resilience have impeded advancements in resilience science. In response, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) developed a general framework for harmonising the conceptualisation of resilience as a dynamic process determined by multiple systems and levels of analysis. Consistent with the NIH Resilience Framework, this paper presents a conceptual model of resilience applied to military service members. This model encompasses four core components necessary for resilience research: (1) the presence of significant challenge, (2) successful adaptation in response to the challenge, (3) the capacity for resilience (i.e., protective factors), and (4) the processes (i.e., mechanisms) by which protective factors exert positive effects on an individual's response. Guided by this conceptual model, we outline key methodological recommendations to advance resilience research and illustrate each using the Advancing Research on Mechanisms of Resilience study as an exemplar. We emphasise the need for future research to examine resilience as a dynamic process and apply a multilevel approach. We hope to provide a basic road map to those interested in improving the rigour of future research on resilience in a military context, the results of which can inform the development of interventions.

Conceptualizing a resilience research framework at TheNational Institutes of Health.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) have recently gathered internal and external input towards a shared understanding of resilience in the wide context of human health and the biomedical sciences that would help accelerate advances in human health and its maintenance. This shared view is that resilience refers in general to a system's capacity to recover, grow, adapt, or resist perturbation from a challenge or stressor. Over time, a system's response to a challenge might show varied degrees of reactions that likely fluctuate in response to the type of challenge (internal and/or external), severity of the challenge, the length of time exposed to the challenge, other external factors and/or biological factors (innate and/or external). We have embarked on this special issue as an opportunity to explore commonalities amongst viewpoints on the science of resilience covered by the various NIH Institutes, Centers, and Offices (ICOs) with respect to the characterization of various systems, stressors, outcomes measures and metrics, and interventions and/or protective factors that are shared within each domain and across multiple domains. Here, resilience is characterized broadly by four areas of scientific study: molecular/cellular, physiologic, psychosocial and spiritual, and environmental/community resilience. Each area or domain provides general frameworks for designing studies that may help advance the science of resilience within the context of health maintenance. This special issue will also acknowledge the remaining gaps that impede advancement of the science of resilience and offer considerations for potential next steps towards addressing the research gaps.

Shaping a resilient future in response to COVID-19

Science today defines resilience as the capacity to live and develop with change and uncertainty, which is well beyond just the ability to ‘bounce back’ to the status quo. It involves the capacity to absorb shocks, avoid tipping points, navigate surprise and keep options alive, and the ability to innovate and transform in the face of crises and traps. Five attributes underlie this capacity: diversity, redundancy, connectivity, inclusivity and equity, and adaptive learning. There is a mismatch between the talk of resilience recovery after COVID-19 and the latest science, which calls for major efforts to align resilience thinking with sustainable development action. The concept of resilience, once meaning the ability to ‘bounce back’ to the status quo, now refers to the capacity to live and develop with change. A mismatch between the latest science of resilience and the talk of resilience recovery after COVID-19 requires resilience thinking to be aligned with sustainable development.

The worst and the best: new insights into risk and resilience in young adults from the COVID-19 pandemic

Historic declines in young people’s mental health began to emerge before the COVID-19 pandemic. In the face of this youth mental health crisis, the pandemic constituted a naturalistic stressor paradigm that came with the potential to uncover new knowledge for the science of risk and resilience. Surprisingly, approximately 19-35% of people reported better well-being in the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic than before. Therefore, in May and September 2020, we asked N=517 young adults from a cohort study to describe the best and the worst aspects of their pandemic lives (N=1,462 descriptions). Inductive thematic analysis revealed that the best aspects included the deceleration of life and a greater abundance of free time, which was used for hobbies, healthy activities, strengthening relationships, and for personal growth and building resilience skills. Positive aspects also included a reduction in educational pressures and work load and temporary relief from climate change concerns. The worst aspects included disruptions and changes to daily life; social distancing and restrictions of freedoms; negative emotions that arose in the pandemic situation, including uncertainty about the future; and the growing polarization of society. Science that aims to reverse the youth mental health crisis must pay increased attention to sources of young people’s distress that are not commonly measured (e.g., their educational, work, and time pressures; their fears and uncertainties about their personal, society’s, and the global future), and also to previously untapped sources of well-being – including those that young people identified for themselves while facing the COVID-19 pandemic.