Health System Resilience as the Basis for Explanation Versus Evaluation Comment on "The COVID-19 System Shock Framework: Capturing Health System Innovation During the COVID-19 Pandemic"

We need to talk about 'bad' resilience

In this analysis, we argue against seeing health system resilience as an inherently positive concept. The rise in the popularity of health system resilience has led to its increasingly normative framing. We question this widely accepted perspective by examining the underlying assumptions associated with this normative framing of 'good' resilience. Our focus is on the risks of accepting the assumption, which can lead us to ignore the social nature of health systems and overlook the consequences of change if resilience is seen as a positive, achievable objective. Finally, we suggest that seeing resilience as a normative concept can be detrimental to health system policy and research, and encourage a critical rethinking of these assumptions so that we can maintain resilience's usefulness for health systems.

How resilience affected public health research during COVID-19 and why we should abandon it

Resilience has accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic as a rallying motto, with calls by governments for a resilient society, resilient families and schools, and, of course, resilient healthcare systems in the face of this unprecedented pandemic shock. Resilience had already gained traction as an analytical concept in public health research for approximately a decade. It became a key concept despite the recognition of its lack of conceptual consistency. The COVID-19 pandemic presented itself as a perfect test-case and encouraged a multiplicity of studies on resilience and health care systems. In this commentary, we add to the existing critiques of resilience in the social sciences by reflecting on the effects of resilience when used to frame empirical inquiries and to draw lessons from the crisis. Resilience as a concept is unable to address crucial structural issues that health systems already faced throughout the world, and it remains a non-neutral political notion. We argue that we need to resist a generalised view of resilience and work with alternative imaginaries.