The influence of community social institutions on individual disaster recovery: a multilevel analysis
Date
2014
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
Social capital, defined as “the norms and networks that facilitate collective action” or the “resources embedded in social networks and social structure that can be mobilized by actors”, is a critical component of disaster recovery and resilience (R. Dynes, 2006). Social capital is viewed by disaster scholars as essential for responding to the new and unexpected problems that arise in disasters (R. Dynes, 2006) and is distinct from other types of capital that communities maintain. Social capital is less affected than physical and human capital in a disaster as it is not a physical asset that can be damaged in a hazard event. Consequently, social capital is a critical preexisting resource that can be leveraged in a disaster to respond to the novel problems that arise rather than setting up new systems, structures, and norms solely for emergency response purposes (R. Dynes, 2006). Establishing a mechanism where communities can foster collective responsibility, identify community capacities, and become involved in planning increases social capital (R. Dynes, 2006; Norris, Stevens, Pfefferbaum, Wyche, & Pfefferbaum, 2008). Social capital has been viewed as powerful for influencing community recovery, even more important than the level of aid a community receives (Aldrich, 2010). ☐ I hypothesize that communities with greater numbers and diversity of community social institutions provide greater opportunities for individuals to interact to build networks and relationships in their communities. Social institutions are a quantifiable mechanism for building social capital at the community level. This community social capital can be leveraged following a disaster to take the collective action necessary for recovery. ☐ This dissertation examines on the influence of a community’s social fabric on individual disaster recovery by examining the impact of the quantity, types, and diversity of social institutions present in a community on individual disaster recovery. I base this line of inquiry on two assumptions. First, neighborhoods matter. They influence a wide range of community and individual health outcomes, including disaster recovery. Second, community factors such as social capital also influence disaster recovery. ☐ Social and physical neighborhood disorder may act as a barrier to developing social cohesion and social capital, both of which contribute to better social organization and collaboration among community groups, in turn contributing to better disaster recovery outcomes (Bates & Peacock, 1989; P. R. Berke, Kartez, & Wenger, 1993; A. Curtis & Mills, 2011).To further explore the role of community social institutions in the context of disaster recovery this study examines the influence of social institutions on disaster recovery outcomes and on perceptions of social and physical disorder then discusses the results in the context of disaster recovery. ☐ Hierarchical logistic and linear modeling were used to investigate the contextual effects of community social institutions on disaster recovery outcomes and the upstream impact of neighborhood social and physical disorder on community social institutions in a sample of households heavily impacted by Hurricane Katrina. Recovery data was obtained through a collaboration with the National Center for Disaster Preparedness using data from the Gulf Coast Child and Family Health Study conducted between 2006 and 2010. Social institutions data was obtained from the Dun and Bradstreet Million Dollar Database and includes data on institutions such as libraries, schools, medical facilities, and civic, professional, and religious groups. Analyses were conducted using ArcGIS 10.1 and Stata 13.1. ☐ When exploring the influence of community social institutions, a proxy for social capital in the community, we found community level social capital had little impact on individual disaster recovery outcomes. Certain individual level factors are strongly associated with positive disaster recovery outcomes. At the individual level, we found that social support, self-efficacy, income, and food security are important for better recovery outcomes. In general, people recover better following disasters when they have enough food and money and they feel like they have the skills and resources to handle the situation. This study takes an important step to break up the construct of social capital and explore its influence at multiple levels. Additional studies are needed to continue to learn more about the nuances of social capital in communities given the recent focus on it as a potential panacea to disaster recovery. Dynes describes social capital as a community level construct that accumulates at the community level (R. Dynes, 2005; R. Dynes, 2006). Our study finds that this effect does not trickle down to influence individual level disaster recovery outcomes. This raises concerns about overemphasizing social capital as the solution that communities can focus on building prior to a disaster and that will make recovery easier, faster, or result in better outcomes. Given the lack of influence on individual level outcomes, the concern is that those that are most vulnerable in a disaster will not receive the appropriate support – financial, food, or reconnecting with social networks – to recover at the household level. ☐ Of 793 families participating in the Gulf Coast Child and Family Health Study that completed the neighborhood disorder survey in 2010, 385 (48.55 percent) report problems with social disorder and 349 (44.01 percent) report problems with physical disorder in their neighborhoods. Community social institutions are not associated with reports of social and physical neighborhood disorder in this study sample. Individual and community level characteristics, however were found to be associated with reports of neighborhood disorder. An examination of the ecological level community characteristics revealed that male population was statistically significantly associated with social disorder. We also observed that households that have their basic needs met such as sufficient income, stable housing, and home ownership do not live in areas with high levels of social or physical disorder. ☐ These findings expose one of the perpetual tensions in concepts of recovery, that the fates of individuals and households can be very different than that of the community as a whole. The implications of this evidence for policy makers is that they must maintain an ambidextrous approach to disaster recovery planning and activities in terms of what scales they wish to make an impact. At the community level there may be value in community based institutions however individual recovery trajectories are determined by individual level characteristics such as income and employment, housing, and household make up that are not easily manipulated by policy interventions. One implication of this which is suggested by both this study and other literature is that policy makers and emergency managers should orient their recovery planning around how to connect people who are generally underserved with community based organizations to meet their needs in the absence of disaster as it is community development in the absence of disaster that is the path to improving disaster resilience (Norris 2008). Faith in social capital is not going to be the panacea that delivers us to community recovery and resilience at least not without a more nuanced understanding of the scale in which it plays out. ☐ This study builds on the existing disaster science scholarship by adding a novel measure of community social institutions as a mechanism for building social capital that can be aggregated to any meaningful scale of analysis and includes a more comprehensive set of social institutions than previous research studies. Applying a measure of community social institutions to individual level disaster recovery outcomes data using both survey and administrative data to empirically investigate the relationship between factors at different levels of analysis takes an important step towards addressing existing gaps in the literature on disaster recovery, social institutions, and social capital.
Description
Keywords
Community social institutions, Disaster recovery, Neighborhood