In Search of the Resilient Sahelian: Reflections on a Fashionable Notion
a rural area. On this village scale, in
line with the social–ecological systems
framework (Walker et al. 2006), resil-
ience can be considered as the continu-
ity or restoration of “functions” essen-
tial to the “village system”. This would
be based on the following approach, in
three steps: define and assess functions
performed by the community (see in-
set); study the community’s resources
(capital and capacities), which enable
it or not, through their interactions, to
It is therefore important to link maintain and restore these functions;
the household with the community to highlight the trajectories and possible
which it belongs, such as a village in threshold effects.
scale. This includes market gardening,
which can represent a significant drain
on water resources, and charcoal pro-
duction, which can lead to a major re-
duction in forest coverage. The same
practice (market gardening, charcoal
production, etc.) can embark on resil-
ience trajectories if it is implemented
by a small number of households in a
given territory, and alternatively foster
situations of resistance or even survival
if it becomes widespread.
Inset: The “functions” of a village community
The definition and assessment of the village system’s functions are based
on the four standard dimensions of sustainability: ecosystemic, economic,
social, and institutional.
Ecosystemic field, productive function: A village is ecosystemically resilient
if the agroecosystems maintain their productive potentialities. Indicators:
agricultural yield trend; hunting and gathering off-take trend; presence of
weeds indicating loss of fertility, etc.
Economic field, subsistence function: A village is economically resilient if
its inhabitants are able to satisfy their basic needs and to avoid adverse in-
corporation to global economy. Indicators: food diversity, accessibility of
health and education services, village’s terms of trade, etc.
Social field, cohesion function