Abstract
This article surveys some examples of the ways past societies have responded to environmental stressors such as famine, war, and pandemic. We show that people in the past did think about system recovery, but only on a sectoral scale. They did perceive challenges and respond appropriately, but within cultural constraints and resource limitations. Risk mitigation was generally limited in scope, localized, and again determined by cultural logic that may not necessarily have been aware of more than symptoms, rather than actual causes. We also show that risk-managing and risk-mitigating arrangements often favored the vested interests of elites rather than the population more widely, an issue policy makers today still face.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 287-297 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Environment Systems and Decisions |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Jun 2020 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2020, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 17 Partnerships for the Goals
Keywords
- Complex historical societies
- Environmental stress
- Existential risk
- Government responses
- Inequality
- Pandemic
- Plague
- Resilience
- Risk mitigation
- System recovery
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Lessons from the past, policies for the future: resilience and sustainability in past crises'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver