Posted on

Resilient mind, body, organization, or social landscape all together? Guest blog by Guven Peter Witteveen


In 2016 I traded my ethnographic toolbox for one in the field of disaster planning and emergency management. Most practitioners come to this field from other starting points, so I am in good company here in rural west Japan. Some of the research centers here and elsewhere on the planet identify resilience as their main subject and disaster risk reduction as something that follows from this primary pursuit. A prominent example is the Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience, and in Japan there is the Resilience Research Council of Japan,, for example. In USA at Northeastern University in Boston, MA, there is the Security and Resilience Studies program. And the international meeting place for government and non-government groups concerned with building up community resilience is online at The word roots go back to the Latin, from re- “back” + salire “to jump, leap.” Like the flexibility contained in the word roots, the flexible ways that people use the word resilient stretches from literal elasticity to figurative ability to rebound in an abstract sort of way. In February 2017 a research article appeared and reviewed dozens of publications in which resilience is a central subject, “What Do We Mean by ‘Community Resilience’? A Systematic Literature Review of How It Is Defined in the Literature.” This article sheds light on the spectrum of this concept. The nine lexical fields that overlap in the 615 surveyed publications are (in no particular order) (1) local knowledge, (2) community networks and relationships, (3) communication, (4) health, (5) governance and leadership, (6) resources, (7) economic investment, (8) preparedness, and (9) mental outlook. These dominant meanings for “resilience” are what I will look at during my recent foray into Japanese society and disaster response planning and practice.

Analytically it seems that the qualities bound up with the concept of resilience can be isolated, measured, and strengthened as components and thus to boost the whole. One can begin by identifying the physical elements that comprise resilience for a group of people belonging to a given environment or who are facing a particular challenge: material resilience includes things like sustenance, shelter, communication and medical care. Next there are organizational elements that go into the resulting level of resilience: things like leadership, reserves of memory and goodwill to work with others, whether stranger or friend. Finally, there are mindset or outlook and attitudes that layer together with the physical and organizational (or social) elements that comprise resiliency: things like hope, confidence, ability to visualize a good ending. The upshot of the article, above, is that “resilience” by itself is too broad and multi-sided to be helpful in understanding the several phenomena meant by “resilient.” Beyond the meanings alone, perhaps it is necessary to factor in the risk peculiarities that face the group of people since each kind of risk will cause them to use up their reserves in different ways: for example, the group of people may be well resilient to changes in climate, livelihoods, or tone of discourse that is circulating in the news media. But taken all together in combination, perhaps the resiliency goes down. Or in another situation perhaps adversity against individuals in the group can be countered collectively, but a broad attack on the whole group may result in less rebound and recovery than it would be for individual members. In any case the conditions to build up resilience are worth examining, as are the types of things that degrade resilience of a community at the level of household, neighborhood, or entire city district.

In the middle 1990s my fieldwork on local history museums led me to work with a citizen movement in rural west Japan as they engaged the local city government to make sure the budgeted museum creation was not steered off course by the mayor at the time. There was scandal that took me into the field of civil society, where I learned the 3-way distinction of ‘hardware’, ‘software’, and ‘heartware’ [Japanese-made English terms written in katakana]. These correspond to the physical, social, and mental/emotional elements of a project. In contrast to the typical interaction of citizen group to city hall in Japan, the people that I worked with expressed great reserves of resilience: at the individual level more were middle age or older, with life experiences widely engaged in various sectors of the society, and most had professional and/or college education. So the two dozen most active people in the group were well equipped in terms of cultural capital (fluent communication in persuasive meanings, symbols, styles, examples), social capital (bank of contacts to call upon; procedural knowledge for Japanese society in general, and the local town’s figures in particular), emotional capital (well-adjusted and able to speak out publicly or privately, according to conditions), and financial capital (wherewithal to pay incidental costs relating to the citizen movement; some latitude in using their time). Having breadth and depth of cultural resources, social and language know-how, available time and money, and the mental/emotional capacity for sustained effort despite obstacles and adversity all added up to the group bringing the scandal to its conclusion, the befouled mayor fleeing the field, and one of their own taking his place. Eventually the local history museum was completed, a new system for Freedom of Information requests was put in place, and support for all NPO (non-profit organizations) around the city was increased with a view to making government more transparent, decisions more accountable to citizens, and involvement by citizens more vigorous. In many ways the legacy of the late 1990s has persisted now into 2017, although some of the bad old ways have crept back in as leadership has changed and high-handedness comes into play occasionally by elected officials.

What is true for a group of people in a citizen movement also is true for responding to disasters. In both cases the group of people and their reserves are challenged by circumstances. Being able to recognize that there is an attack, communicating well both internally and externally, organizing available resources and remedies, and then persistence to overcome the difficulty (either by sheer sustained efforts and commitment, or by creatively reframing and trialing work-arounds) are the things needed for successfully facing the problem and rebuilding the reserves for resilience. Readers may perhaps look at their own household or workplace and find this same experience of resilience is true, as well: expending one’s reserves, but building back better with help from others and in the fullness of time. This constant ebb and flow of challenges and response are hallmarks of social life on a planet of many seasons and ecosystems. What maybe is different now is the pace of changes to society, livelihoods, physical mobility and communication bandwidth (exposed to more, able to reach out a long way, expectations for quicker results). The organizing principle of “extreme weather events” can be applied equally well to the social climate – disruption, dislocation, discomfort have been with us before, but now these are more frequent and they occur in at a bigger scale in our separate lives and in our collective lives. So it is worth understanding the roots of resilience and how to grow them better than before.

Links List:

Security and Resilience Studies program at Northeastern University,

Resilience Research Council of Japan,

Zilient , NGOs, INGOs, academia, government, and the private sector]

Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience,

What Do We Mean by ‘Community Resilience’? A Systematic Literature Review of How It Is Defined in the Literature FEBRUARY 1, 2017

What Do We Mean by ‘Community Resilience’? A Systematic Literature Review of How It Is Defined in the Literature

Guven’s Biography:

Outreach is the third part of the university mission for creating knowledge (research), maintaining it (teaching), and using it (service; practical application). This engagement between expertise and the wider public is Guven’s career road: he is building a systematic approach to the work of outreach education to discover the relative merits of each form it takes in order to improve the visibility, usability and results among the communities being served. His training in ethnographic methods, documentary skills at producing multimedia and his work with museums and international centers provides a map for this career path. He is eager to assess and advise organizations about how better to reach out to their audiences.

Posted on


The Social Enterprise Festival 2017 is brought to you by City, University of London in partnership with Santander and Queen Mary University of London.

The Festival is dedicated to promoting social enterprise and supporting entrepreneurs in delivering social impact through business.

On Monday 20th February MELA in partnership with the Knowledge Quarter, presents ‘The Power of the Network’.

We are all increasingly reaching out to other stakeholders across multiple sectors to form partnerships, develop collaborations, exercise influence and empower communities. The Knowledge Quarter and MELA are naturally interested in networks – inter organisational, cross disciplinary, multilevel partnerships that enable us to achieve the extraordinary goals we have set ourselves.

In this session we will explore the ways we have developed our networks, and how we work with other organisations locally, nationally and internationally to share knowledge, resources, goals and people. We will also examine specific techniques social enterprises can use to build and develop their own partnerships, bringing together speakers from distinguished backgrounds to share lively presentations on developing partnerships and harnessing the power of the network.

To find out more about the festival click here.

To book on to the Knowledge Quarter event click here.

Posted on

Noha speaks at the Mayor of London’s Social Integration Mayoral Summit

Have you ever thought about the value of your social networks?

Those people that opened doors for you; who supported you in making things happen?

This is what I would like to focus on…

How do social networks that BRIDGE between cultures make a SIGNIFICANT impact on social integration?


There is plenty of research that shows that ‘social relationships matter’; that ‘social networks are a valuable asset’. In fact, the greater our web of ties to people OUTSIDE our social group the higher are our life chances and social mobility, and even our well-being.

In short, we are more plugged in to society.

That is why the approach we take at MELA focuses primarily on how to build these social networks that bridge between cultures. Because we know that interaction enables people to build communities, to commit themselves to each other, and to knit the social fabric. In fact face-to-face encounters are the only way to build trust and tolerance.

Our approach always starts with identifying the divisions or silos that keep ‘knowledge’ of other people flowing in closed loops. If we begin thinking about how we link these loops together we can create an exponential impact on society as a whole. We are particularly interested in those meeting points. The public places where these encounters happen. It could be the street market, the library or the leisure centre. Then we begin to think how we can animate these spaces in ways that encourage intercultural conversations? Activities like sharing food, experiencing world music or team sports can engage people of different ages and backgrounds.

But it is not enough to think locally.

Cities have a responsibility to ensure their citizens are plugged in and are economically included, healthy, and safe.

But what we’ve found is that cities can’t deliver these outcomes alone. They need organisations – like MELA – to partner them because we are making a difference on the ground. That’s why we have set up ‘Bridging Cultures Roundtables’ in core cities. Our aim is to bridge between city leaders and local social innovators. And network them with the corporate and cultural sectors.

One recent example has been in Bristol. For the first time neighbourhood-based cultural organisations are being networked with those in the city centre.  Our aim is to share bridging cultures good practice but also to create the business case for the corporate sector to engage.

And cities can also benefit from networking internationally.

To scale up the impact of the Roundtables we are now working with the Council of Europe’s flagship programme, the Intercultural Cities Network. Our aim here is to share social innovations across its 100 member cities.

And it’s not just Europe, the most exciting news is that MELA has been invited to Jerusalem next month to network social innovators to scale up their impact in their city.


In conclusion, social networks are valuable. If we want our cities to be socially integrated we have to start with building those social networks that bridge cultures wherever we can. I invite cities to partner and nurture their social innovators – we are key partners in making social integration happen.


picture-with-matthew-ryder Posing with Deputy Mayor of Social Integration, Matthew Ryder




Posted on

Balsall Heath in Conversation

MELA was funded by the Arts Council to deliver an intercultural participatory digital storytelling project. MELA commissioned artists Dan Burwood, Friction Arts and Ana de Matos to engage people in Balsall Heath to listen and to capture personal stories about living together. Stories formed and created conversations across different formats:

  • Created up to 38 opportunities for artist-led storytelling engagement activities in partnership with Ashram Moseley Housing Association, Balsall Heath Forum and St Paul’s Community Trust.
  • Delivered an artist-driven immersive spatial experience as a pop-up cafe and  ‘World Café’ event for participants, local residents, community managers, artists and Mela Associates to meet.

Our project engaged Balsall Heath residents to creatively imagine Moseley Road as a new social space for different cultures to mix, targeting the community wholly with existing and new participants.

You can view the ethnographic film here and a short documentary of the project here.


Posted on

MELA creates new conversations with people in Balsall Heath

MELA’s artist-led intercultural project, ‘Balsall Heath in Conversation’, has started to make a presence on the Moseley Road where people from all backgrounds are sharing their personal stories in exchange for a fresh juice. The aim of the project is to develop new relationships and networks across the diverse neighbourhood, culminating in an event that will celebrate the stories of local people and create a new intercultural meeting place on the Moseley Road. The Juice Bar was on the Moseley Road on 15th and 22nd July, and will next be seen on 23rd September.









Posted on

MELA wins Arts Council Grant for ‘Balsall Heath in Conversation’

Artists Ana Godinho De Matas, Sandra Hall of Friction Arts and Dan Burwood have been commissioned to create new conversations between different cultures and groups in Balsall Heath to increase social cohesion. The project ends with a big event to showcase the work and provide further opportunities for creating a new meeting place on the Moseley Road, that currently severs both sides of the neighbourhood.