Resilience to capitalism, resilience through capitalism: indigenous communities, industrialization, and radical resilience in Arctic Alaska

Kevin C. Hillmer-Pegram
Wed, 22 Apr 2026 17:56:42 PDT

A large and expanding body of scientific evidence shows that the Arctic is experiencing rapid social-ecological changes. Arctic stewardship is a framework for governance that is based on the principles of resilience thinking and is gaining prominence in both academic and political settings. However, critical scholars have indicted resilience thinking for failing to adequately comprehend the social dimensions of social-ecological systems. Resilience, therefore, remains a problematic theoretical foundation on which to base governance. The aim of this dissertation is to improve resilience thinking so that it can overcome its demonstrated shortcomings and thereby contribute to improved Arctic governance. I propose a novel theoretical framework called radical resilience, which integrates conventional resilience thinking with key insights from the political economic theories of certain Marxists and post-Marxists – namely that the capitalist mode of production and consumption is a key driver of ecological degradation and social inequity. Focusing on populations who maintain high degrees of non-capitalist modes of economic activity, I use radical resilience to answer the research question: How is the global capitalist system affecting the social-ecological resilience of Indigenous communities in northern Alaska as the Arctic continues to industrialize? Empirical case studies revolving around the three sectors of industrial activity increasing the fastest in the Arctic – tourism, natural resource extraction, and shipping – show that the relationship between capitalism and the resilience of Indigenous communities is complex and conflicted. While engaging in capitalism challenges traditional values, it is also a key strategy for maintaining adaptive capacity. Rather than calling for local places to ‘weather the storm’ of change – as resilience has been critiqued for doing –governance should enable local influence over global processes through enhanced bottom-up democracy, or what the resilience literature calls revolt.