This confusion is fed by a lack of differentiation between 'resilience' as a political agenda, as described above, versus 'resilience' as a technical approach that offers added value on top of existing risk management approaches. They are not the same thing, yet both are necessary to ensure that resilience is successfully implemented, and that it complements, rather than replaces, proven best practices. The 'agenda' should provide the vehicle to implement the ‘technical approach'. The great obstacles for realising the potential of resilience result from the multitude of interpretations of what resilience is, and lack of agreement in how to go about building resilience that addresses the risk attached to the full range of shocks and stresses, and the uncertainty of these, that people, communities and nations face. Demonstrating the interconnectedness of different risks and how these may differ between individual, community and national 'layers', in order to provide a rationale for approaching resilience as a truly holistic methodology.