14 chapter 1 with the adversity, and can change for the better by adapting to the adversity. This dissertation sets out, first, to develop and validate a reliable instrument to measure transilience (Chapter 2), which is needed to establish whether people perceive they can be transilient in the face of contemporary adversities (and to test whether higher transilience promotes adaptation actions and mental health). The transilience scale should capture well the three theorised components, yet it should also reflect that transilience is an overarching construct. We aim to test the validity of this transilience scale by examining whether transilience is positively related to existing constructs that are theoretically related (i.e., self-efficacy, outcome efficacy and resilience), while, at the same time, it does not overlap with these constructs. We also aim to establish that transilience does not imply that people deny or downplay the risks posed by contemporary adversities, as people would hardly see the need to adapt without acknowledging the adversity (see Van Valkengoed & Steg, 2019b). As elaborated upon below, in this dissertation we aim to examine whether people perceive transilience across different adversities and contexts, and whether they perceive they can be transilient as individuals as well as communities. Do People Perceive Transilience across Different Adversities and SocioPolitical Contexts? While contemporary adversities share some common features (e.g., uncertainty), they are remarkably different. Pandemics, like COVID-19, can represent an immediate and direct threat to individual survival, whereas climate change consequences tend to be more gradual and cumulative (Poortinga et al., 2022; IPCC, 2014a). Additionally, the effects of a pandemic on personal health can be visible within days or weeks, while the severity of climate change risks may take longer periods to manifest, especially in Western countries (IPCC, 2014c). Besides, the type, impact and severity of the threat associated with contemporary adversities likely varies between different areas and countries. For instance, risks associated with climate change vary considerably across regions: in the United States, North-Eastern regions face increased rainfall and sealevel rise, whereas regions located in the in coastal South-West face risks of droughts and wildfires (Clayton et al., 2016); similarly, the severity of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic varied greatly across countries and regions, depending on factors such as the capacity of the healthcare system, the level of preparedness, and the effectiveness of measures taken to contain the virus. In Italy and Spain, for instance, the pandemic caused high infection and mortality rates, overwhelming healthcare systems and leading to shortages of equipment and staff, which worsened public panic (Amaro, 2020; Horowitz, 2020). In contrast, countries like Germany and The Netherlands had lower infection and mortality rates due to a stronger healthcare systems and early containment measures (Hoekman et al., 2020; Spahn, 2020). Therefore, we aim to examine whether people perceive transilience across different adversities (i.e., climate
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw