Social Capital and Disaster Resilience Nexus: A Study of Flash Flood Recovery in Jeddah City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Governments, researchers, and humanitarian agencies have increasingly focused on reducing disaster impacts and enhancing the resilience of individuals, households, and communities, as the human and economic costs of natural disaster events have dramatically increased over the past century. Achieving resilience in a disaster context means the ability to survive future natural disasters with minimum loss of life and property as well as the ability to create a greater sense of place among residents, a stronger, more diverse economy, and a more economically integrated and diverse population. However, less attention has been paid to the significance of social capital in a post-disaster context and its contribution in building community resilience. It is very obvious that the contribution of social capital to post-disaster resilience in a Middle Eastern/Saudi Arabian context is virtually unknown. With a focus on the Saudi Arabian context, this research paper develops a social capital framework centered on resilience and post-disaster recovery. To conduct this study, a holistic approach to data collection is followed through questionnaire surveys, structured and non-structured interviews with citizens, and informal discussions with government and major stakeholders related to flash flood disaster management in the City of Jeddah. It is interesting to note that several religious institutions have played important roles in evacuating people and providing help for a quick recovery. In addition, government organizations are taking the recovery process seriously by providing necessary help in the flood-stricken areas. Within the scope of the given framework, the research explores and evaluates the role of social capital in post-disaster recovery efforts through a case study of the 2009 and 2011 Jeddah flash floods.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".