Affluence and vulnerability are often seen as opposite sides of a coin—with affluence generally understood as reducing forms of vulnerability through increased resilience and adaptive capacity. However, in the context of climate change and an increase in associated hazards and disasters, we suggest the need to re-examine this dynamic relationship—a complex association we define here as the Affluence–Vulnerability Interface (AVI). We review research in different national contexts to show how a more nuanced understanding of the AVI can (a) problematize the notion that increasing material affluence necessarily has a mitigating influence on social vulnerability, (b) extend our analysis of social vulnerability beyond low-income regions to include affluent contexts and (c) improve our understanding of how psychosocial characteristics influence people’s vulnerability. Finally, we briefly outline three methodological approaches that we believe will assist future engagement with the AVI.

This explorative study provides insights into how civil protection organizations can learn, be innovative, and develop their capabilities toward achieving greater organizational resilience. After the enormous impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, civil protection organizations had to actively shape crisis-related learning processes, particularly concerning workflows and organizational structures, collaboration with stakeholders, preparedness, risk analysis, digitalization, and the political framework. Empirical findings collected in Europe during and between the main pandemic peaks of 2020 and 2021 were analyzed for implications for policymakers and civil protection organizations. Key findings illustrate how important it is for civil protection organizations to respond quickly and adapt flexibly in times of crisis. In interviews with civil protection experts, respondents highlight the benefits of a partner network and the need for digital capabilities and data infrastructure. Other relevant factors in dealing with a crisis were found to be self-evaluation and the ability to recover from a previous wave while preparing for and responding to the next.

This chapter examines the governance of health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic and reflects on three interrelated challenges that need to be addressed in future assessment approaches for achieving systemic resilience: problems of scale, trust and politics. The chapter focuses on digital surveillance technologies and vaccines, two cornerstones in the efforts to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 around the globe. Tracing apps were introduced in many countries, but their effectiveness has been constrained by issues of data privacy, insufficient interoperability and digital inequalities. In parallel, a global research race enabled the development of different vaccines with unprecedented speed, building on innovative biotechnologies. However, vaccination worldwide was marked by disparities in access and controversy. We conclude that governance and assessment should be built around strong international coordination and cooperation, without limiting local experimental learning and innovation. Further, public trust should be considered as a necessary condition for the success of any technological innovation in the health context. As trust in policymakers, academia and industry is strongly context-specific, global governance should also be sensitive to the diversity of social and cultural contexts. Finally, to improve overall systemic resilience, global power imbalances should be addressed in all phases of the innovation process.

Mission-oriented policies (MOIP) have become important means to foster transformative change in many countries. Yet, approaches for assessing these policies' impacts are still in their infancy, not least due to the complexity of MOIP. To address this gap, we propose a toolbox approach that supports policy-makers during policy design and implementation, and allows for an identification of potential impacts by a theory-based approach. To disentangle the complexity of missions, we first conceptualize MOIPs as multiple translation processes from mission formulation and design to implementation. Each translation step shapes the policies' impacts. Based on this framework, we develop a set of specific analytical tools that are intended to support the process of bringing missions into realization, but also help to assess whether missions contribute to the postulated goals. These tools include a mapping of the socio-technical systems, a typology to explore the transformative ambition of missions, a process to develop impact pathways, an inventory of policy instruments to support the mission design, and indicators to measure mission progress along the developed pathways. Finally, we propose several analytical questions to explore the context for the development of potential impacts.