Abstract
Recovery efforts after natural disasters typically focus on physical infrastructure. In general less attention is paid to the social infrastructure that might impact the capacity of the community to rebuild. We examine perceptions of preparedness and recovery (markers of resilience at the community level) in the wake of Superstorm Sandy with a novel data set that includes a multi-mode survey of twelve neighborhoods severely affected by the storm. With these data, we suggest that social resources are associated with beliefs about neighborhood resilience. People who live in communities with higher social cohesion (coefficient = .73, p <.001), informal social control (coefficient = .53, p <.001), and social exchange (coefficient = .69, p <.001) are more likely to believe their neighborhoods are well prepared for a disaster. Likewise, people living in communities with higher social cohesion (coefficient = .35, p <.01), informal social control (coefficient = .27, p <.05), and social exchange (coefficient = .42, p <.001) are more likely to be confident their neighborhoods will recover quickly from a disaster. However, the effects of social resources on beliefs about resilience vary based on neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) and the impact of the storm. Informal social control and social exchange lead to a greater increase in confidence in recovery in low, as compared to high, SES neighborhoods. Social resources tend to have more impact on perceptions of recovery in communities less affected by the storm. In sum, these findings suggest the potential value of various forms of social intervention to better equip communities to respond when disaster strikes.
Highlights
The relatively recent increase in climate-related disasters has drawn attention to variation in recovery, both for individuals and their communities [1,2]
We examine the two facets of collective efficacy—social cohesion and informal social control—separately, in an attempt to gain a more fine-grained insight into how each might contribute to beliefs about preparedness and recovery
Informal social control and social exchange were all associated with higher levels of neighborhood disaster preparedness
Summary
The relatively recent increase in climate-related disasters has drawn attention to variation in recovery, both for individuals and their communities [1,2]. Social cohesion is more than a network of personal connections and involves a broader sense of attachment to the community [13]. It can be seen as reflecting a normative orientation toward the community and a belief about how the community might collectively respond in time of need. Informal social control refers to residents’ willingness to intervene on behalf of each other and the ability of a community to regulate its members. The combination of mutual trust (social cohesion) and willingness to act (informal social control) provides the basis for a community’s collective efficacy and capacity to achieve common goals. Collective efficacy is goal-specific, and the ability of a community to accomplish one goal (e.g., lower crime) could differ from its capacity to accomplish another goal (e.g., enhance the health of residents), such capacities are often highly correlated [16]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
