The science of recovery capital: where do we go from here?

Abstract

Background The concept of recovery capital (RC) has emerged in studies and discussions of the addiction recovery process and as a potential metric and marker for recovery gains. Although conceptual and applied development of the concept in the 20 years since the term was coined has increased, there remains insufficient clarity of key domains, factors and best practice research and applications for populations experiencing addiction. We aimed to review progress around the conceptualisation and operationalisation of RC and to consider future directions for a science of recovery capital. Method We provided a brief overview of theoretical foundations and advances, empirical measurement and application in treatment and continuing care settings. We next introduced four primary areas for addiction science to address, namely: (i) conceptual development (e.g. how RC domains are unique, but interrelated entities, valence of RC), (ii) empirical testing, adequacy of measurement and analysis, (iii) directions for novel application in treatment and recovery settings and (iv) dissemination and communication to policy, practice and lived experience groups. In this review, we also focussed on some of the challenges that must be addressed for a science of RC, which could produce long‐term impact in treatment and policy. Results Despite burgeoning empirical work on RC, its application and translation has been unsystematic. The field currently relies on self‐report questionnaires for the development of the theory and quantification of RC. Therefore, there is an urgent need for rigorous and systematic conceptual and empirical development of RC. Conclusions A formal collaboration between scholars, practitioners and experts by experience worldwide would move recovery capital forward in an empirically driven and culturally appropriate manner, as would testing its applicability at individual, organisational and societal levels.

Service Providers’ Perceptions of Substitute Addictions in the Western Cape, South Africa

“…Programmes with the same treatment philosophy may differ concerning the specific treatment interventions used, and the frequency and duration of sessions allocated to developing coping skills. Factors that hamper recovery are conceptualized as recovery barriers (Best & Hennessy, 2022). Thus, there is a need to differentiate substitutes that lead to negative consequences from substitutes that reduce harm and may support recovery efforts.…”

A contextualized reinforcer pathology approach to addiction

“…Although improvement in these domains during recovery does not explicitly quantify or measure alternative reinforcement, such improvements are consistent with the behavioural economic perspective. Indeed, the term ‘recovery capital’ has been coined to reflect the importance of the accrued personal, social, financial and cultural substance-free resources that aid the journey to recovery 140 , 141 , and definitions of recovery increasingly account for holistic improvements across valued life domains, in addition to reductions in drug use .…”

Self‐help/mutual aid groups for health and psychosocial problems: Key features and their perspectives in the 21st century

“…As is evident from the above research, an important area of study for community psychology and SH/MAGs in the field of addictions concerns the enhancement of members' social networks and, more broadly, their social capital through their participation in these groups. The strengthening of social and recovery capital, which is one of the key issues in enhancing recovery (Best & Hennessy, 2021), occurs through participation in SH/MAGs (Martinelli et al, 2020). The study of recovery capital may therefore be a privileged area of research for community psychology.…”