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

Methodological Challenges in Social Vulnerability and Resilience Research: Reflections on Studies in the Canterbury and Tohoku Disasters*

“…The key here is that, in disasters, nonregular connections can emerge and existing ones become fortified or suspended. In other words, some forms of regular connections such as recreational networks may become unimportant in disasters (Uekusa, ). Typically, the socially vulnerable, like the linguistic minority immigrants and refugees I studied, already generally possess the strong social capital necessary to negotiate everyday social disadvantages in host countries (Portes, :13).…”

“…In disaster research, a language barrier is often understood as a simple factor associated with social vulnerability: linguistic minorities often have limited access to critical information during disasters and in postdisasters (e.g., Arlikatti, Taibah, and Andrew, ; Cutter, Boruff, and Shirley, ; Tierney, ). However, they should not be responsibilized for speaking dominant languages and accessing information (Uekusa, ). It is also problematic that disaster researchers have limited linguistic capital and access to the linguistic minority communities in disaster research if we are to study their social vulnerability.…”

“…Linguistic minority disaster researchers are generally rare (there are, of course, many exceptions to this statement). Due to linguistic barriers, a linguistic minority group is less accessible to mainstream monolingual disaster researchers than other socially vulnerable populations, such as the disabled or elderly, women, or racial minorities who speak the dominant language (e.g., Minagawa, ; Uekusa, ). Thus, language might be one of the most overlooked factors contributing to a barrier between the researcher and the researched, even before the interviews commence.…”

“…Despite a potential lack of empirical evidence, I use my field notes and study reflections to answer my research questions and conduct a critical analysis. The results of my interviews and fieldwork are not the objective in this article; however, before discussing methodological challenges and access issues in my research, I will provide a brief overview of the research process and results of my doctoral research (for detailed results, please see Uekusa, ).…”

“…However, this cross‐national research aimed not only to capture a wide range of disaster experiences among diverse nationalities and cultural backgrounds, but also to compare and contrast these diverse groups to emphasize their commonalities . This is valuable information that typical detail‐rich case studies do not offer (see, e.g., Uekusa, ). With respect to gender, I interviewed 13 males and 15 females of various age groups (between the ages of 20 and 50) to ensure diverse voices.…”