‌‌‌‌

This paper outlines current approaches to communicating about risk and resilience, and offers guidance on how to communicate about resilience within donor agencies, with partners, and to other important stakeholders such as parliaments and taxpayers.

There has been much talk about risk and resilience over the last couple of years – much talk and perhaps also much confusion. Lack of coherent communication about what resilience means, how results can be measured and the value that resilience will add to a crowded development agenda have become major sticking points. This has hindered translating what seems like a common-sense concept, with strong political buy-in, into action on the ground. The confusion stems from three main factors: lack of coherent messages about what resilience entails; different actors defining resilience based on narrow mandates, and in a competitive environment for funds, and; resistance from experienced actors in the field, who are already struggling to implement existing initiatives.