Abstract With the concept of resilience increasingly deployed across a range of issues in development studies—from conflict resilience to climate resilience—this paper considers the relevance of resilience concepts to current issues and concerns in global mental health. Resilience discourses can be seen as one response to the need for more holistic accounts of mental health that focus, not only on stressors and risk factors for mental ill health, but also recognize the sometimes overlooked capacities of people and communities to manage and coproduce their own mental wellbeing. For example, migration forms the backdrop to global mental health for a significant proportion of the world’s populace. And yet, thus far, most literature on migrant mental health has tended to focus on risk factors and stressors with comparatively little consideration given to potential sources or resources for positive mental health and coping with adversity. Nevertheless, while concepts of “resilience” are increasingly advocated in development studies and global mental health contexts, such concepts also have their critics. For example, resilience rhetorics can “depoliticize” by appearing to normalize otherwise unacceptable circumstances which might—from post-development and other alternative critical perspectives—be viewed as politically constituted through-and-through.

中文翻译：

---

关于在移民和全球精神卫生中使用精神卫生适应力概念的思考

摘要随着抵御能力的概念越来越广泛地应用于发展研究中的各个方面（从冲突抵御力到气候抵御力），本文考虑了抵御能力概念与当前问题和全球心理健康关注的相关性。抵御能力话语可以看作是对更全面的心理健康描述需求的一种回应，这种关注不仅要关注精神疾病的压力源和风险因素，而且要认识到人们和社区有时在管理和联合生产自己的心理方面的能力心理健康。例如，移徙构成了全球大部分人口全球心理健康的背景。到目前为止，关于移徙者心理健康的大多数文献都倾向于集中在危险因素和压力源上，而很少考虑积极心理健康和应对逆境的潜在来源或资源。然而，尽管在发展研究和全球心理健康环境中越来越提倡“韧性”的概念，但这些概念也受到批评。例如，复原力修辞似乎可以通过规范化否则不可接受的情况而“去政治化”，否则这种情况可能会从发展后和其他替代性的批判角度被视为政治上贯穿始终的构成。尽管在发展研究和全球心理健康环境中越来越提倡“韧性”的概念，但这些概念也受到批评。例如，复原力修辞似乎可以通过规范化否则不可接受的情况而“去政治化”，否则这种情况可能会从发展后和其他替代性的批判角度被视为政治上贯穿始终的构成。尽管在发展研究和全球心理健康环境中越来越提倡“韧性”的概念，但这些概念也受到批评。例如，复原力修辞学可以通过使正常化的否则无法接受的情况“去政治化”，这些情况从发展后和其他替代性的批判角度来看可能被视为从头到尾的政治构成。