Methods for Understanding Community Resilience

Analysts have argued that disasters should be conceptualized as social processes that play out over time, rather than as a singular event. As a social process, both social and physical context matter. A growing body of... [ view full abstract ]

Analysts have argued that disasters should be conceptualized as social processes that play out over time, rather than as a singular event. As a social process, both social and physical context matter. A growing body of research has demonstrated the role of community structures, identities, and community orientated activities to both mediate and moderate disaster related impacts. Furthermore, research has shown that the ways a community responds to catastrophic disruption tend to differ insofar as the disaster process is viewed as ‘natural’ or ‘man-made.’ In a context where the disaster catalyst is seen as natural, it is argued that a ‘therapeutic community’ tends to emerge as people band together to provide mutual aid and exhibit a high level of cohesiveness in response and recovery efforts. In contrast, man-made technological disasters are argued to lead to a far different community response.  In such cases, rather than being viewed as beyond human control (i.e., “an act of God”), divisions arise as a conflict-ridden environment often culminates in a ‘corrosive community.’ Consequently, “community” plays an important role in shaping differentials in vulnerability and risk, as well as how people come to conceptualize potential losses and other impacts incurred from potentially catastrophic events. To that end, in this paper I examine the role of community—in terms of physical and social characteristics—in influencing social response to catastrophic disruptions. In doing so, my analysis aims to contribute to the sociological literature on disaster-related community disruption.