English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the past decade, food security and nutrition practices have become central in the promotion of resilience in protracted crises. Such approaches have been welcomed by the aid community because of their potential for linking relief and development. Social and political analysts, however, have criticized resilience approaches for failing to consider power relations and because they entail an acceptance of crisis or repeated risk. In this context, regimes of food security and nutrition practices have become increasingly targeted, privatized and medicalized, focussing on individual behaviour and responsibility rather than responsibility of the state or international actors. This article uses examples from Sudan to examine how and why the resilience ‘regime of practices’ has functioned as a form of neoliberal governmentality, and argues that it has created a fantasy in which conflict in Darfur is invisible. This allowed food aid to be withdrawn and removed the need for protection despite ongoing conflict and threats to livelihoods; thus crisis-affected populations have been abandoned.

Protracted crisis, food security and the fantasy of resilience in Sudan