La nueva deducción del derecho natural

Social capital can be described as the quantity and quality of social resources (e.g., membership in groups, social relations, networks, and access to wider institutions in a community) upon which people draw in pursuit of their livelihoods (Frankenberger & Garrett, 1998). According to Putnam (1995), social capital encompasses social organizations such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit. Social capital has often been called the “glue” that binds people in a society

together (Frankenberger et al., 2013). The interactions between residents in tight-knit communities, the abil- ity to rely on others in times of crisis, and open communication between stakeholder groups are mostly seen as symbols of well-developed social capital. Earlier literature found that the extent and application of social capital is a crucial element in determining community disaster resilience (Aldrich, 2012; Wilson, 2012; Elliott et al., 2010). It is also important to enhance social capital to build resilience at the household level. For example, social capital provides information, knowledge, and access to members of a network during pre-disaster events (Aldrich, 2012). This information and knowledge increases human capabilities for han- dling future disasters.

Aldrich (2012) provides a straightforward analytical approach for measuring the influence of social capital through bonding, bridging, and linking networks. Bonding and bridging refer to networking among people, while linking concerns relationships across networks, as it involves governments and NGOs (Aldrich, 2012). Most previous research has measured social capital by considering participation in various forms of civic engagement, such as membership in voluntary associations, churches, or political parties, or at levels of expressed trust in other people (Schuller, 2001). Based on this groundwork, the current study mostly focuses on household networks and membership when measuring social capital because in the context of the study area, networks and membership within various organizations are crucial factors with respect to household resilience (Islam and Walkerden, 2014).

3.3.2 Natural capital

Natural capital refers to natural resources available to individuals and communities, such as land, water, forest, wildlife, and biodiversity; environmental conditions for life and work; and ecosystems that maintain clean water, air, and a stable climate (TANGO, 2006; Smith et al., 2001). Natural capital is key to sustaining all forms of life, including human life, and natural resources form a key capital that can be managed through collective action.

Several authors have found that the resilience of a community is linked to the condition of its natural envi- ronment and the maintenance of its productive natural resources (Gill & Ritchie, 2011; Cutter et al., 2008; Folke, 2006). In addition to simply possessing natural capital, the management of natural resources and ecosystem services while maintaining a sustainable livelihood base is a key element of community resilience (Pasteur, 2011; Twigg, 2009). From the viewpoint of disaster resilience, natural resources such as wetlands and vegetation play an important role in protecting coastal areas from weather-induced hazards such as cyclones and storm surges (Frankenberger et al., 2013). However, human activities are often responsible for the depletion of the stock and quality of this natural capital (Mayunga, 2007). Hence, it is necessary to

Although natural capital can be assessed through water quality, air quality, soil quality, land, forests, and national and local parks, land is the predominant factor for aquaculture and agriculture production in the coastal villages of Bangladesh. In addition, water scarcity and quality are key challenges in this coastal area. Hence, the current study considers access to land and water when assessing natural capital in the study areas.

3.3.3 Physical capital

Physical capital denotes basic infrastructure (e.g., transportation, shelter, communications, water systems, health facilities, and markets), production equipment, and other material means that enable people to main- tain their safety and enhance their relative level of well-being (Gill & Ritchie, 2011; Mayunga, 2007). Physical capital is one of the most important resources for communities when building capacity to cope with disasters, as it can operate at a level that provides households and groups the means to survive and recover during and after natural or man-made disasters (Longstaff et al., 2010; Pasteur, 2011). However, access to physical capital is difficult for poor rural residents, although, as Longstaff et al. (2010) indicate, while com- munities are not always directly able to control some of the physical assets available to them (e.g., power systems), they may be able to influence them through indirect means. Mayunga (2007) noted that critical facilities are important for ensuring that residents have resources and support during a crisis. Moreover, lack of physical infrastructure or critical facilities may have direct negative impacts on the capacity of households or communities to cope with disasters. Physical capital can therefore be assessed based on access to educa- tional institutes, housing, mass media (TV, newspaper, computer), toilets/latrines, and household machineries.

3.3.4 Financial capital

Financial capital describes the financial resources that households rely on to achieve their economic and social objectives. According to TANGO (2006), financial capital refers to cash and other liquid resources, for example, savings, credit, remittances, pensions, and so on. Researchers (Buckle et al., 2001; Gahin et al., 2003) have shown that financial capital can directly ward off vulnerabilities through mechanisms such as insurance schemes and construction of protected homes and businesses. Investing financial capital in recovery phases can have direct and positive consequences for community infrastructure (through construc- tion of roads, bridges, dams, etc.) and human capital development (through funding of health care and education; Gill & Ritchie, 2011). Financial capital can play a key role in supporting community resilience by providing financial services (e.g., microfinance) and by sustaining small- and medium-size enterprises in the event of social and economic disruptions (Twigg, 2009; Pasteur, 2011). Numerous studies have con- cluded that financial capital can be measured through household income, property value, employment, and investments (Frankenberger, 2013). However, some scholars (Hudner & Kurtz, 2015) point out that income

is the outcome of all other forms of capital. Hence, this study measured financial capital through various forms of savings and loans.

Based on the above theoretical and conceptual reflections, this section reframes the four research outlined in the Introduction (see section 1.3) and identifies the different aspects that need to be considered in the course of the theoretical orientation to resolve them.