Advancing the science of adverse childhood experiences and resilience: A case for global and ecological perspectives

Research on adverse childhood experiences and resilience (the process of overcoming trauma) has been dominated by studies originating in wealthy democracies of the global north. We call for more global and ecological approaches not only for documenting the true global burden of childhood adversity, but also for advancing the science of resilience and understanding pathways to overcoming trauma. We identify several forms of trauma that need better consideration in prevalence estimates, including state, political, and institutional violence, crisis migration, climate change and related natural disasters, and global health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We also need more nuanced analyses of culture and place and to recognize that the global south and global north are not monolithic concepts. We offer illustrative examples of how more global, ecological approaches can enhance our understanding of pathways to overcoming even high dosages of childhood adversity. One of the key insights of ACEs research, the dose-response relationship between trauma burden and outcomes, has been extended to research on resilience. Concepts that capture the total “dose” of positive assets and resources (people's resilience portfolios ) are showing how people might overcome even high doses of trauma. This work can become more global by including incorporating strengths and healing processes common in collectivist, versus individualistic, cultures. It can become more ecological by recognizing that physical environments—both natural and human-made built aspects—play key roles in resilience. Recognizing the intersectionality among these elements can take us to the next generation of trauma and resilience science. • Research on adverse childhood experiences needs a global focus that includes cultural, political, and economic contexts. • We need to pay more attention to adversities outside the family, in schools and communities. • Resilience work also needs to be more global and ecological by including community and environmental resources.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Child Protection and Practice
Published
2024-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chipro.2024.100060
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Child Abuse and Trauma
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.20
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Advancing the science of adverse childhood experiences and resilience: A case for global and ecological perspectives

Cristián Pinto‐Cortez, Edgardo Toro, Cristóbal Guerra, Sherry Hamby
5 citations
Child Protection and Practice
Child Abuse and Trauma
3.20
article

Advancing the science of adverse childhood experiences and resilience: A case for global and ecological perspectives

Cristián Pinto‐Cortez, Edgardo Toro, Cristóbal Guerra, Sherry Hamby
article en
5 citations

Abstract

Research on adverse childhood experiences and resilience (the process of overcoming trauma) has been dominated by studies originating in wealthy democracies of the global north. We call for more global and ecological approaches not only for documenting the true global burden of childhood adversity, but also for advancing the science of resilience and understanding pathways to overcoming trauma. We identify several forms of trauma that need better consideration in prevalence estimates, including state, political, and institutional violence, crisis migration, climate change and related natural disasters, and global health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. We also need more nuanced analyses of culture and place and to recognize that the global south and global north are not monolithic concepts. We offer illustrative examples of how more global, ecological approaches can enhance our understanding of pathways to overcoming even high dosages of childhood adversity. One of the key insights of ACEs research, the dose-response relationship between trauma burden and outcomes, has been extended to research on resilience. Concepts that capture the total “dose” of positive assets and resources (people's resilience portfolios ) are showing how people might overcome even high doses of trauma. This work can become more global by including incorporating strengths and healing processes common in collectivist, versus individualistic, cultures. It can become more ecological by recognizing that physical environments—both natural and human-made built aspects—play key roles in resilience. Recognizing the intersectionality among these elements can take us to the next generation of trauma and resilience science. • Research on adverse childhood experiences needs a global focus that includes cultural, political, and economic contexts. • We need to pay more attention to adversities outside the family, in schools and communities. • Resilience work also needs to be more global and ecological by including community and environmental resources.

Child Protection and PracticeVol. 3
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Child Abuse and Trauma
3.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.