This article is a contribution to a critical resilience literature that emphasizes the lack of recognition and consideration of social and power relations, the complexity of local cultural heterogeneity and aspects of justice in current resilience approaches. We base our contribution on an empirical study related to policy and project interventions implemented by governmental agencies and international development partners in Laos. The studied interventions are the so-called ‘village livelihood development grants’ that involve giving individual households cash payments to limit shifting cultivation practice and to engage in ‘alternative and more sustainable’ livelihood activities, promoted by a number of state policies and donor funded projects. Promoted alternative livelihoods include cash crop production, cattle rearing and income generating activities, such as weaving. Based on our empirical case, we explore the implications of these interventions on local peoples' livelihoods, food security and access and rights to resources, on the one hand, and offer theoretical implications to resilience scholarship, on the other hand. We identify analytical elements with respect to social and power relations and show their relevance for local community members' ability to deal with the imposed external forces to change, and hence community resilience. We find that horizontal and vertical power relations, exercised through direct/visible and indirect/hidden ways, significantly influence the socio-ecological outcomes of the interventions, and abilities of individual members of the community to benefit, or bear costs and risks from the interventions.

中文翻译：

---

老挝社区复原力和轮垦政治中的权力关系

本文是对批判性复原力文献的贡献，该文献强调缺乏对社会和权力关系的认识和考虑、当地文化异质性的复杂性以及当前复原力方法中正义的各个方面。我们的贡献基于与老挝政府机构和国际发展伙伴实施的政策和项目干预相关的实证研究。研究的干预措施是所谓的“乡村生计发展赠款”，涉及向个体家庭支付现金以限制轮作做法并参与“替代和更可持续”的生计活动，由许多国家政策和捐助者资助的项目推动. 促进的替代生计包括经济作物生产、养牛和创收活动，例如编织。基于我们的实证案例，我们一方面探索这些干预措施对当地人民的生计、粮食安全以及资源获取和权利的影响，另一方面为复原力研究提供理论影响。我们确定了关于社会和权力关系的分析要素，并展示了它们与当地社区成员应对强加的外部变化力量的能力以及社区韧性的相关性。我们发现，通过直接/可见和间接/隐藏方式行使的横向和纵向权力关系，显着影响干预措施的社会生态结果，以及社区个体成员从干预措施中受益或承担成本和风险的能力.