SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE DIMENSIONS OF COMMUNITY RESILIENCE AT WAR TIME (BASED ON THE RESULTS OF A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ANALYSIS)

Olga Kuzmuk

doi:10.23856/6522

Olga Kuzmuk Volyn National University named after Lesya Ukrainka https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9729-1785

Keywords: Community resilience, Social cohesion, Public participation, Public activity, War, Social ties.

Abstract

The article is devoted to studying community resilience in the context of war in Ukraine. It analyzes both subjective and objective dimensions of resilience that affect the ability of local communities to adapt to crisis conditions. The empirical foundation of the research consists of interviews and focus groups with representatives of executive and local authorities, the public sector, business, volunteer organizations, and informal initiatives, conducted within the framework of the Polish-Ukrainian research grant «Multilevel governance of the humanitarian crisis caused by the Russian aggression on Ukraine, using examples from the Lublin Voivodeship (PL) and the Volyn Oblast (UA)» (funded by NAWA). Subjective aspects of resilience encompass public perceptions, trust among community members, and emotional resilience, which is manifested in people's willingness to support one another. Objective dimensions include infrastructural, economic, and social resources that contribute to recovery after crises. The results indicate that distinguishing between subjective and objective aspects of resilience is an effective tool for developing policies capable of supporting communities in wartime. This article aims to contribute to the understanding of the complexity of community resilience in times of crisis and social instability.

References

1. Aldrich, D. P., & Meyer, M. A. (2015). Social capital and community resilience: The role of social networks in disaster recovery. Sociological Science, 2, 241-262.
2. Berkes, F. (2017). Evolution of co-management: Role of social capital in building resilience. In The Routledge Handbook of Ecological Resilience (pp. 49-63). Routledge.
3. Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (2002). Back to the future: Ecosystem dynamics and local knowledge. In Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change (pp. 121-146). Cambridge University Press.
4. Berkes, F., & Ross, H. (2013). Community resilience: Toward an integrated approach. Society & Natural Resources, 26(5), 515-520.
5. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood.
6. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120.
7. Cutter, S. L., Brennan, R., & B. M. (2010). Disaster resilience: A national imperative. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 52(2), 25-29.
8. Fritz, C. E. (1961). Disasters. In R. K. Merton & P. L. Kendall (Eds.), The Focused Interview: A Manual of Problems and Procedures (pp. 651-672). Free Press.
9. Fukuyama, F. (1999). The great disruption: Human nature and the reconstitution of social order. Free Press.
10. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
11. Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1-23.
12. Klein, R. J. T., & Nicholls, R. J. (2012). Ecosystem-based approaches to climate adaptation: A review of the evidence. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 3(2), 202-214. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.164
13. Magis, K. (2010). Community resilience: An indicator of social sustainability. Society & Natural Resources, 23(5), 401-416.
14. Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56(3), 227-238.
15. Meyer, M. A. (2013). Community resilience: A framework for understanding and supporting local resilience. Sociology Compass, 7(2), 113-128.
16. Norris, F. H., Stevens, S. P., Pfefferbaum, B., Wyche, K. F., & Pfefferbaum, R. L. (2008). Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1-2), 127-150.
17. Paton, D., & Johnston, D. (2001). Disaster resilience: An integrated approach. In Disaster Management: A Disaster Management Handbook (pp. 1-24). New Zealand: University of Otago.
18. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster.
19. Putnam, R. D., & Goss, K. (2002). Introduction: The role of social capital in community building. In Democracy and its Discontents (pp. 3-23). New York: New York University Press.
20. Sztompka, P. (2000). Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge University Press.
21. The architecture of help. Multilevel governance of the humanitarian crisis caused by the Russian aggression on Ukraine on the examples of activities in the Lubelskie Voivodeship (PL) and the Volyn Oblast (UA). Comparative research report
22. Tilly, C. (2004). Social movements, 1768–2004. Paradigm Publishers.
23. Twigg, J. (2009). Disaster risk reduction: Mitigation and preparedness in development and emergency programming. Good Practice Review 9. Humanitarian Practice Network.
24. Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why equality is better for everyone. Allen Lane.