Resilience has recently emerged as a conceptual and operational buzzword spanning every facet of the international development agenda. The rise of resilience provides renewed opportunities for geographers to critically engage with the policy sphere and shape ongoing discourse over the nature of resilience programming. Yet, while aspects of the political economy of resilience have long been acknowledged in both academic and practitioner literatures, scholarly inputs have had limited influence in addressing issues of power and scale as applied directly to resilience programming. In this commentary, we argue that enhanced uptake of geographic enquiry is contingent on geographers being more proactive in engaging with resilience practitioners. One way of doing so is to tailor scholarly inputs to three critical elements of the programmatic cycle, namely how resilience-building activities are funded, delivered, and evaluated. Using these three facets, we highlight key practical and ethical considerations worthy of further geographic enquiry – focusing on issues of power and scale as concepts at the heart of geography.

中文翻译：

---

应对弹性规划的力量和规模：呼吁参与资金、交付和评估

复原力最近成为一个概念性和操作性的流行词，涵盖国际发展议程的各个方面。复原力的兴起为地理学家提供了新的机会，使他们能够批判性地参与政策领域并塑造关于复原力规划性质的持续讨论。然而，尽管长期以来学术界和从业者文献都承认弹性政治经济学的各个方面，但学术投入在解决直接应用于弹性规划的权力和规模问题方面的影响有限。在这篇评论中，我们认为地理调查的提高取决于地理学家更积极主动地与弹性从业者接触。这样做的一种方法是根据计划周期的三个关键要素调整学术投入，即如何资助、交付和评估复原力建设活动。使用这三个方面，我们强调了值得进一步地理研究的关键实践和伦理考虑——关注作为地理核心概念的权力和规模问题。