The paradox of social capital: A case of immigrants, refugees and linguistic minorities in the Canterbury and Tohoku disasters

Abstract

The usual argument in disaster research is that those with stronger social capital are more resilient; therefore, the socially vulnerable can be resilient. However, in the disaster literature, little attention has been paid to the reasons why the socially vulnerable develop social capital in the first place. This qualitative research explores reasons for the formation and avoidance of social capital in relation to linguistic minority immigrants and refugees in the 2010–2011 Canterbury and Tohoku disasters. Taking influence from Bourdieu, the argument is made that resilient individuals developed their multifaceted social capital due to the lack of other forms of capital and their specific needs in different contexts. However, contextualized social factors such as race, gender and class also influence others’ decision to avoid social capital. These reasons for not forming social capital in pre-/post-disaster can explain why some socially vulnerable were surprisingly resilient and others are further marginalized.