Running Head: ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

Ecological and Cultural Influences of Resilience

Alison Lessard
EDPS 650
University of Calgary

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

Ecological and Cultural Influences of Resilience

Invulnerable, invincible, and remarkable are just a few of the adjectives that have been
used to describe children who are able to grow up well despite significant threats to their
wellbeing. Natural disasters, disease, war, poverty, abuse, neglect, economic hardship, and
political strife threaten the development of children globally. Resistance to threats to ones grow
up well, has become known as the phenomenon of resilience. Resilience has been used to
describe individuals, who despite serious maltreatment or trauma experienced typical
developmental trajectories, or displayed an absence of psychopathology and low levels of
distress. Initially, resilient people were thought to possess a unique traits or genetic
predisposition to overcome tragedy. However, over the past two decades the lens of resilience
research has changed dramatically, evolving from a narrow focus upon individual characteristics
to one that includes a variety of risks and protective factors with the context of a persons
environment. Ungar (2011) suggested individuals adjust not as a result of what they do, but what
their environment provides and how well they are able to access supports. One of the key
elements of recent resilience research has been the focus upon an ecological perspective where
culture and context is considered in conjunction with individuals. The purpose of this paper is to
provide an overview of the evolution of the concept of resilience and discuss recent research of
ecological perspectives with a focus upon the influence of cultural influences.
Overview of Resilience Research
According to Masten (2014), World War II set the stage for the study of resilience after
global attention focused upon the plight of children affected by related disasters. Initially,
resilient children were viewed by science as possessing traits or other personal attributes that

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

rendered them invulnerable to trauma. Michael Rutter (1987) is commonly referred to as one of a
handful of pioneers of resilience research (Masten, 2001; Ungar, 2011). Interestingly, Rutter
(1987) himself was a child refugee, as he was evacuated from Britain during World War II.
Perhaps as a result of his personal experience, he developed a keen interest in discovering why
some people suffered significantly from stress and adversity, while others were somehow able to
prevail. Individual characteristics such as intelligence, flexibility, social skills, and problem
solving ability have been associated with resilience (Kirmayer, Dandeneau, Marshall, Phillips, &
Williamson, 2011). In addition, risk factors were considered to increase the probability of
various psychopathologies and disorders were also identified. Such risks included maltreatment,
traumatic life events, and exposure to violence (Masten, 2014).
Rutter (1987) was first to highlight the dynamic nature of what are considered protective
processes associated with resilience. Rutter (1987) suggested the rather than study broad
descriptors or protective factors, researchers should instead search for the developmental and
situational mechanisms involved in protective processes (p. 317). In other words, Rutter (1987)
suggested resilience should be considered in terms of specific processes or the adaptations
families, communities, and individuals make despite dysfunction, rather than remarkable
individual traits. Gradually over time, studies of resilience began to discover the complexity and
inter-relatedness of multiple factors. Recently, Masten (2014) indicated resilience could be
defined as the capacity of a dynamic system to adapt successfully to disturbances that threaten
system function, viability, or development (p.6). As such, the focus of resilience research has
changed from studying individuals to examining multiple external factors that compromise or
support protective systems for development.

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

Ecological View of Resilience

Ungar (2013) suggested the interpretation of resilience should be considered as the
capacity for both individuals and their environments to work together to support developmental
processes. The complexity of the concept of resilience necessitated less emphasis upon
individual traits and more on the quality of a child or individuals social and physical ecology
(Ungar, 2011). For example, in order to fully understand the effects of traumatic events such as
chronic parental abuse on a child, it is be important to consider the broader environment in which
the child has been exposed to. Resilience from an ecological standpoint, not only expanded the
view to involve the environment but also the capacity of individuals to navigate toward available
resources and negotiate the resources be provided in culturally appropriate ways (Ungar, 2011).
The notion of navigation and negotiation according to Ungar (2011) suggests shared
responsibility for the positive development between individuals and their social and physical
worlds. Studies of resilient youth indicated these individuals tend to place themselves in healthier
contexts (navigate) and engage in conversations about what they need to be successful
(negotiation). Ungars (2011) concept of navigation includes personal agency but also
movement toward resources that have been made available and accessible to those in need.
Navigation as described by Ungar (2011) includes the ecological framework where individuals
are able to connect to available resources. An example of how Ungars (2011) theory relates to
real life in communities, is violent and impoverished communities may result in children
developing aggressive behavior in adaptation to their environment. When such communities are
provided with appropriate supports such as policing, government involvement, and education
regarding parenting practices, they are less violent, their children grow up well, and demonstrate
greater resilience. Iwasaki and Bartlett (2006) stated an ecological perspective of resilience

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

includes a positive outlook where research is focused on examining the strengths of individuals
and communities rather than simply negatives or weaknesses. This ecological perspective
created more emphasis on the social determinants of health including schools and community
settings as well as political and cultural belief systems (Betancourt and Khan, 2008).
Cultural Influence on Resilience
Recent research regarding resilience has emphasized the importance of cultural
influences in supporting individual responses to adversity or threat (Betancourt & Khan, 2008;
Iwasaki & Bartlett; Ungar, 2011). A need has been identified for sensitive acknowledgement of
how culture and context support healthy development (Ungar et al., 2007). Cultural resilience
includes culturally relevant coping strategies such as spirituality and traditional practices. A
major criticism of resilience research in the past, has been its emphasis on Western civilizations
(Ungar et al., 2007). Current resilient research practices have become more globally focused and
inclusive of a variety of ethnic groups (Jones, 2007; Kirmayer et al., 2011; Ungar, 2011). Wexler
(2014) stated historical factors such as colonialism, discrimination, displacement, genocide, and
natural disasters result in cultural stress and bereavement. In addition, trauma has a tendency to
be transmitted within families and generations, ultimately weakening the resilience of large
groups of individuals around the world. Wexler (2014) indicated cultural practices and traditions
influence how people manage, interpret, and respond to threat. In some cases however, culture
also inhibits resilience by narrowing possibilities for individuals (often women) to participate in
restorative cultural practices or access supports (Wexler, 2014).
In Canada, cultural resilience is present within Aboriginal populations. Despite their
many inherent differences and tribal affiliations, Canadian indigenous peoples share similar
historical experiences of oppression, displacement, and loss of autonomy and control (Kirmayer

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

et al., 2011). In their study of Mikmaq, Inuit, Mohawk, and Metis communities Kirmayer et al.
(2011) discovered Aboriginal people have diverse notions of resilience. However, a strong sense
of connection to the community and the environment, the importance of collective history, as
well as individual agency and activism were found to be factors that increased resilience
(Kirmayer et al., 2011). As well, an emphasis upon the importance of oral histories or personal
narratives and revitalizing traditional languages and traditions were also found to support mental
health among Aboriginal populations (Kirmayer et al., 2011). Iwasaki and Bartlett (2006) stated
culturally relevant methods of coping such as traditional healing, spiritual practices, purposeful
cultivation of cultural identity were resilience-based practices identified by Aboriginal adults in
their study.
Jones (2007) discovered African American children who were exposed to ongoing
community violence, reported spirituality was a significant source of support that increased the
likelihood of coping with trauma. In addition, Jones (2007) reported formal kinship support
offered interconnectedness for youth in the neighborhoods that were studied. Another key
protective factor for resilient children exposed to chronic violence, were informal kin who
were non-blood relations with strong ties to the childrens family and community (Jones, 2007).
These findings suggest a comprehensive network that is culturally relevant is a valuable source
of support.
Zraly and Nyirazinyoyes (2010) study of genocide-rape survivors in Rwanda
demonstrated how trauma was made more bearable by participating in traditional practices that
emphasized withstanding, living again, and continuing life. Along with social connectedness
with others who had similar experiences, practicing these coping strategies and traditional
methods of resilience processes, appeared to help them make meaning, establish normalcy, and

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

endure suffering (Zraly & Nyirazinyoye, 2010). Betancourt and Khan (2008) cautioned that
while cultural influences upon resilience is promising and offers another perspective about
building on strengths, it should not minimize the gravity and severity of the situations people
have been exposed to, nor should it offer an overly rosy impression of the scope of cultural
influences on resilience.
Implications for Practice and Intervention
A more thorough understanding of processes that promote resilience can assist the design
of interventions and support. As well, sensitivity to unique ecological and cultural influences
and awareness of protective and risk factors is also important. Supportive interventions for an
Inuit child of the North West Territories, may not exactly mirror what a child living in a violent
neighborhood in Africa requires. Wexler (2014) stated youth need to better understand how
culture can be connected to their personal understandings and collective strengths, which can
enhance their ability to withstand challenges. Iwasaki and Bartlett (2006) also referred to
strength-based approaches, suggesting resource providers should focus upon the development
strengths of individuals, families and communities in order to hinder the impact of adversities.
Zraly and Nyirazinyoye (2010) highlighted populations most at risk for effects of violence,
maltreatment, neglect, political strife, and other travesties are also those who are most impacted
by limited supports and suffering. Thus, the design and delivery of individual and community
supports should include an ecological focus, be culturally meaningful, and varied enough to
ensure children who are supported grow up well.
Conclusion
Ann Masten (2001) eloquently stated:
The great surprise of resilience research is the ordinariness of the phenomena.

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

Resilience appears to be a common phenomenon that results in most cases from

the operation of basic human adaptational systems. If those systems are protected
and in good working order, development is robust even in the face of adversity. (p.227).
Mastens (2001) view of resilience continues to be relevant today as the focus of research has
shifted gradually from individual characteristics to an ecological and cultural and now a global
perspective. Mastens (2001) statement also has profound implications for supporting individuals
within communities and society as a whole. Protecting adaptational systems and understanding
processes that promote resilience can inform the design of external services. One can assume
every child possesses the traits Masten (2001) described as ordinary magic, to do well in the
face of adversity or the ability to adapt to environmental stresses. Any interventions should then
attend to wide range of factors, including those related to culture and environment. Finally, since
cultural factors related to resilience are globally significant, future studies should focus upon
factors that support the adaptation, well being and resilience of children and individuals with
cultural and ecological sensitivity.

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

References
Betancourt, T. S., & Khan, K. T. (2008). The mental health of children affected
by armed conflict: Protective processes and pathways to resilience.
International Review of Psychiatry (Abingdon, England), 20(3), 317328. doi:10.1080/09540260802090363
Bonanno, G. A., & Diminich, E. D. (2013). Annual research review: Positive
adjustment to adversitytrajectories of minimalimpact resilience
and emergent resilience. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
54(4), 378-401. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12021
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. In
R. M. Lerner and W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology (6thed., Vol. 3, pp.
793-828). New York: Wiley.
Iwasaki, Y. & Bartlett, J. (2006). Stress-coping among aboriginal individuals
with diabetes in an urban canadian city: From woundedness to
resilience. Journal of Aboriginal Health, 3(1), 15.
Jones, J. M. (2007). Exposure to chronic community violence: Resilience in
african american children. Journal of Black Psychology, 33(2), 125-149.
doi:10.1177/0095798407299511.
Kirmayer, L. J., Dandeneau, S., Marshall, E., Phillips, M. K., & Williamson, K. J. (2011).
Rethinking resilience from indigenous perspectives. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.
Revue Canadienne De Psychiatrie, 56(2), 84.

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

10

Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic. resilience processes in development. The American

Psychologist, 56(3), 227-238. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227
Masten, A. S. (2014). Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child
Development, 85(1), 6-20. doi:10.1111/cdev.12205
Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. The
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57(3), 316-331.
doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.1987.tb03541.x
Ungar, M., Brown, M., Liebenberg, L., Othman, R., Kwong, W. M., Armstrong,
M., & Gilgun, J. (2007). Unique pathways to resilience across cultures.
Adolescence, 42(166), 287-310.
Ungar, M. (2011). The social ecology of resilience: Addressing contextual and cultural ambiguity
of a nascent construct. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 81(1), 1-17.
doi:10.1111/j.1939-0025.2010.01067.x
Ungar, M. (2013). Resilience, trauma, context, and culture. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14(3),
255-266. doi:10.1177/1524838013487805
Zraly, M., & Nyirazinyoye, L. (2010). Don't let the suffering make you fade
away: An ethnographic study of resilience among survivors of
genocide-rape in southern rwanda. Social Science & Medicine, 70(10),
1656-1664. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.017

ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL INFLUENCES OF RESILIENCE

11