Social Vulnerability in Disasters: Immigrant and Refugee Experiences in Canterbury and Tohoku

Abstract

This comparative study qualitatively explores how linguistic minority immigrants and refugees experienced the 2010–2011 Canterbury and Tohoku disasters, including their coping mechanisms and their perceived vulnerabilities and resilience. The data used for this qualitative analysis was primarily drawn from 28 in-depth interviews with linguistic minority immigrants and refugees and their supporting organization staff conducted in 2015–2016. Additional material was drawn from two publicly available data sets. Immigrants and refugees are typically thought of as being more vulnerable in disasters. However, findings drawn from this research demonstrate the nonlinearity, complexity, and contextuality of social vulnerabilities in disasters, suggesting that they are not necessarily powerless help-seekers in some cases. Using Bourdieu’s capital theory, this study demonstrates how immigrants and refugees were active social agents in these disasters. Consequently, we need to reconceptualize the social vulnerability approach. Some study participants had experiences of going through wars and everyday disasters, which made them more resilient. This is conceptualized here as earned strength, which can be a significant resource in disasters for the socially vulnerable. This chapter hopes to answer some critical questions regarding the social vulnerability approach: how do we incorporate the structure–agency concept, how do we theoretically deal with the contextuality/nonlinearity of social vulnerability in disasters, and how do we conceptualize a research study that can seek more practical and generalizable findings, instead of event-driven and disaster-specific findings?

Citation

Uekusa, S. (2017), "Social Vulnerability in Disasters: Immigrant and Refugee Experiences in Canterbury and Tohoku", Recovering from Catastrophic Disaster in Asia (Community, Environment and Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 18), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 127-144. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2040-726220160000018006