Transformation of social capital during and after a disaster event: the cases Chañaral and Diego de Almagro, Atacama Region, Chile

The Role of Trust in Disaster Risk Reduction: A Critical Review

“…Residents in such communities are inclined to assist neighbors in need by sharing resources, providing shelter, offering financial support, aiding in disaster preparedness through early warning information, and providing emotional support [28]. Furthermore, trust among community members can facilitate resource access planning and the establishment of rescue teams during the response phase [15], and a high level of trust in institutions and the government can expedite recovery following a disaster [16].…”

“…The significance of trust in reducing the complexities and costs of risks lies in fostering a robust sense of concern, solidarity, and active engagement within the community. This, in turn, may lead to a more efficient response to emergencies [15,16].…”

Relevance of social capital in preserving subjective well‐being in the face of the COVID‐19 pandemic

“…Semi‐structured literature review studies consider that social capital has some positive effects on increasing resilience or decreasing vulnerability to disasters (Morsut et al, 2021). From a perspective of disaster risk and resilience, social capital impacts the ability of a community to absorb an impact and overcome the situations generated, influencing the speed and effectiveness of initial responses, as well as the long‐term recovery process (Castro‐Correa et al, 2020; González‐Muzzio, 2013; Navarro Cueto et al, 2017). Disaggregating social capital there are three main realms: (1) bonding: relationships developed between members of the same group or community through the development of trust and cooperation that reflects social cohesion; (2) bridging: relationships expressed horizontally between different groups or communities through the generation of collaboration or partnership networks; and (3) linking: vertically integrated relationships between groups and communities with administrative bodies such as local governments, and other institutions and organizations at different levels (Aldrich & Meyer, 2015; Navarro Cueto et al, 2017).…”

Experiencia y afrontamiento ante el riesgo aluvional: Un modelo mediacional múltiple.

“…Otros elementos interpersonales y contextuales para considerar son el capital social (Babcicky & Seebauer, 2017;Castro-Correa et al, 2020), la resiliencia comunitaria (Adger & Brown, 2009, Sandoval-Díaz, 2020, el apego de lugar (Berroeta, & Pinto de Carvalho, 2020;Guillard et al, 2019), el empoderamiento (Paton et al, 2008) y la propiedad de la vivienda (Grothmann & Reusswig, 2006), los cuales deberían sumarse a los de carácter intrapersonal -características de vulnerabilidad socioeconómica, edad, educación, sexo- (Botzen et al, 2009;Cid et al, 2012;Kellens et al, 2011;) y a las dimensiones disposicionales de ajuste psicológico, como la reevaluación, la expresión emocional regulada, el autocontrol no represivo y la descarga emocional (Olivos-Jara et al, 2020;Sapiains & Ugarte, 2017;Wlodarczyk et al, 2016). En síntesis, son necesarios más estudios sobre la comprensión de respuestas adaptativas-resilientes ante la intensificación riesgos hidrometereológicos bajo el contexto del cambio climático (Amérigo et al, 2019;ipcc, 2014).…”

“…Finalmente, si bien estos antecedentes destacan la importancia de estudiar contextualmente (y articular) estos distintos mecanismos psicosociales para afrontar de forma adaptativa los riesgos socionaturales (Amérigo et al, 2019;Berroeta & Pinto de Carvalho, 2020;Olivos-Jara et al, 2020;Sapiains & Ugarte, 2017), es de destacar que para el caso de Chile ha predominado el estudio de amenazas de tipo terremoto y tsunami (Arias et al, 2017;Bronfman et al, 2016;Cid et al, 2012). Para el caso de los aluviones, algunos antecedentes cualitativos destacan el papel del capital social (Castro-Correa et al, 2020), los medios de vida sostenibles familiares (Sandoval-Díaz et al, 2020), y el crecimiento postraumático diferenciado en grupos vulnerados (Sandoval-Díaz & Cuadra-Martínez, 2020). No obstante, son escasos los estudios nacionales que desarrollan modelos explicativos que articulen factores primarios y secundarios (Lechowska, 2018), y menos en términos de variables mediadoras de las capacidades activas de afrontamiento ante el riesgo aluvional (Navarro et al, 2020; en tanto factores centrales para una gestión local y comunicacional efectiva de los riesgos (Birkholz et al, 2014;Lindell & Perry, 2012).…”