Resilience is increasingly used to inform natural hazard risk management. From global to national to local levels of governance and decision making, resilience concepts are becoming institutionalized and operationalized in both public and private domains. However, as these ideas have shifted from their origins in ecology and been adopted by other disciplines, policy makers, and practitioners, key insights from the initial ecological conceptualization have been left behind. The resulting gap between resilience as originally theorized and its current implementation gives rise to several interconnected challenges: (i) loss of nuance in the meaning of the concept due to rapid adoption, which leads to: (ii) an inability to adequately account for normative or qualitative aspects of social theory, and: (iii) the problem of measurement. Key factors associated with resilience are intangible (difficult to objectively measure) and public bureaucracies are reliant upon objective measurement, i.e., targets and indicators, to operationalize policies. Multi-capital frameworks have been advanced as a potential solution to the problem of measurement in the literature. In this paper, we critically analyze how the concepts of social and human capital can be used to address these challenges and account for intangible sources of value. Drawing on a case study of complex multi-hazards in rural Aotearoa-New Zealand (NZ), as well as the NZ government’s Living Standards Framework (a multi-capital framework) we highlight the importance of addressing these challenges to adequately realize the benefits of resilience and identify the successes and limitations of this approach. Results provide insight into the interlinked nature of the challenges and the importance of reconciling resilience theory and praxis. Findings also demonstrate the potential ways in which a combination of resilience thinking and multi-capital frameworks can add value to decision-making structures within public bureaucracies, the private sector, and academia.

中文翻译：

---

在新西兰 Aotearoa 推进弹性的实际应用

复原力越来越多地用于通知自然灾害风险管理。从全球到国家再到地方层面的治理和决策，复原力概念在公共和私人领域都变得制度化和可操作化。然而，随着这些思想从生态学的起源转变为其他学科、政策制定者和实践者所采用，最初生态概念化的关键见解已被抛在后面。由此产生的最初理论化的弹性与其当前实施之间的差距引起了几个相互关联的挑战：(i) 由于快速采用而失去了概念含义的细微差别，这导致：(ii) 无法充分说明规范或社会理论的定性方面，以及： (iii) 测量问题。与复原力相关的关键因素是无形的（难以客观衡量），公共官僚机构依赖客观衡量标准（即目标和指标）来实施政策。多资本框架已经作为解决文献中衡量问题的潜在解决方案而得到发展。在本文中，我们批判性地分析了如何使用社会和人力资本的概念来应对这些挑战并解释无形的价值来源。借鉴新西兰奥特罗阿 (NZ) 农村复杂的多重灾害案例研究，以及新西兰政府的生活标准框架（多资本框架），我们强调了应对这些挑战以充分实现效益的重要性并确定这种方法的成功和局限性。结果提供了对挑战相互关联的性质以及协调弹性理论和实践的重要性的洞察。调查结果还展示了韧性思维和多资本框架的结合可以为公共官僚机构、私营部门和学术界的决策结构增加价值的潜在方式。