Ensuring the long-term sustainability of humanitarian or community development projects is one of the most complicated and important challenges facing the sector - how do we make sure the positive impact of our work continues long after we are not present in the country? How can the concentrated efforts of a newly established emergency response support long-term community resilience?

This challenge is even more prevalent in emergencies, as we are by definition, working under extreme uncertainty - unable to plan for the long term, all while trying to support communities whose entire infrastructure is not functioning as before. Yet, this is exactly why we should look at resilience from the beginning, in order to minimize uncertainty and to make sure the community is able to take ownership of its own recovery and be prepared for the next emergency.

To tackle this challenge, humanitarian and development actors should focus on identifying the resources within communities and their Social Capital, in order to build upon and strengthen resilience and long-term impact, even within the context of emergencies. 

Linking Community Resilience & Social Capital

 Social capital (SC) exists within all societies and can be defined as the benefits that individuals and groups generate from their networks, interactions, levels of trust between community members and the ability to engage in collective action.  Social interactions fostering trust building, social support, civil society engagement and community networks may all promote SC and the successful accumulation of SC may lead to a well-functioning economic system and a higher level of political integration- two factors that feature acutely in  building resilience. 

Fundamentally, research on SC focuses on networks and distinguishes between three different types of networks within a community. Firstly, Bonds, these are links between people based on a sense of common identity such as family, close friends, and people who share our culture or ethnicity, commonly referred to as peoples’ ‘safety nets ’. Secondly, Bridging which refers to links that stretch beyond a shared sense of identity to distant friends, colleagues, or associates for example. Lastly, Linking encompasses connections to people or groups further up or lower down on the social ladder such as agencies, organizations, local governments and companies.

Defining resilience

The UN defines resilience as the ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate and recover from the effects in a timely and efficient manner, including the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions. Resilient communities are capable of supporting their needs by managing and utilizing their assets and resources, including physical assets, human capital, traditional knowledge, indigenous skills and technologies, and solidarity networks. Resilient communities also hold functioning institutions, local organizations, and networks that enable them to achieve their collective goals, through resistance or coping mechanisms. Resilience is also seen as the capacity to ‘adapt’. In this article we argue that this adaptive capacity depends to a large degree on the structure of the community’s Social Capital.

Strengthening social capital for resilient communities. 

 To strengthen a community's resilience, it is essential to foster connections among community members, local organizations, businesses, and governmental bodies, effectively enhancing SC. These connections create social networks that help people better understand risks and encourage them to take proactive measures to prevent disasters. Furthermore, it may be suggested that the root cause of disasters is often found in the societal framework itself, which might perpetuate inequalities and increase vulnerability to such events.

Considering the literature, a number of Best Practices emerge to successfully strengthen SC for more resilient communities. They include:

• Involving local community groups in strategic and operational decisions. 

• Recognizing potential local leaders and community-based leadership and improving their capacity to organize communities and improve infrastructure. 

• Facilitating the connections between different groups through the processes of bridging  and linking, while also improving physical access, modern technology and providing physical resources.

 

IsraAIDs approach to building community resilience. 

Emergencies require swift action to alleviate the suffering of affected people as quickly as possible. While the fast, mass distribution of aid can rapidly reach many affected people, working in a community-based, Social-Capital-focused approach that requires building trust and meaningful relationships with local communities and partners, is critical. While this process is often a more complicated and lengthy one, it leads towards more sustainable results.

Founded in 2001, IsraAID is an Israel-based international humanitarian NGO that works to support disaster-affected communities around the world. IsraAID’s mandate extends from initial emergencies towards long-term resilience programming. As such, they work not only to provide immediate aid but also to strengthen existing capacities in order to leave behind a more resilient community that is better positioned to face future disasters. To achieve this, interventions must create trust, identify local networks, and focus on resilience from the very first day of emergency response. This, according to IsraAID’s approach, is the best way to build partnerships with communities for future comprehensive programs. A relevant case study for the implementation of this approach is IsraAID’s response to a crisis in Malawi.

 

Malawi Disaster Response  

IsraAID arrived in Malawi in March 2023, as part of its emergency response, days following the powerful Tropical Cyclone Freddy’s destructive landfall. The Cyclone, the most powerful storm to hit Malawi since the ’80s, displaced over half a million, decimated crops, and destroyed essential WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) infrastructure in hundreds of villages across the southern districts. Prior to Freddy’s arrival, Malawi was facing one of the most severe public health crises of the past two decades with a nationwide Cholera outbreak which was just about to dissipate when the Cyclone hit. Thus, rural and urban communities with already overstretched and underfunded systems faced a double humanitarian emergency.

IsraAID’s work to respond to this double crisis was focused in three districts of Southern Malawi, including Blantyre, Malawi’s second-largest city. The primary interventions included rehabilitation of boreholes and water pumps and other emergency relief methods, such as distribution of hygiene kits with basic items to maintain the health and dignity of people sheltering in temporary accommodation. The focus on water infrastructure was critical, as access to safe and clean drinking water can help mitigate cholera.

 

_{Water committee training, Phalombe District - IsraAID emergency response in Malawi. |Photo by Thoko Chikondi} 

As IsraAID was working, it focused on providing essential services while supporting local social capacities. What does this look like, practically? Reflecting on the considerations to  strengthen social capital as aforementioned, IsraAID emphasized the following specific methodologies: 

First, the team involved local community groups, such as the local district officials, community water committees, and village leadership, in mapping and prioritizing borehole sites according to their importance within the community. These individuals even led much of the process in some cases. Through this mapping, IsraAID was able to focus on the rehabilitation of boreholes in schools, which are  often pinpointed as the center of villages’ community life and resources, while school leadership often serves as focal points during emergencies. Local knowledge, existing communal networks, and mechanisms, such as the school’s predetermined role in emergencies and the authority of local leadership, were the crucial components of Social Capital IsraAID identified and worked with. By linking it with the external resources IsraAID provided, the organization developed a partnership that allowed for a scaled-up project and greater reach, all in a community-centered approach. 

In addition, relief items provided by IsraAID were only distributed directly by community leaders instead of  the organization’s branded staff members. This is important in order not to harm the leadership’s position in the community or to jeopardize internal trust in existing social structures.

Secondly, the team supported existing mechanisms for knowledge and personal skills sharing by organizing special training sessions for local water committees and village technicians on the maintenance and rehabilitation of boreholes. In the training sessions, participants received the knowledge and tools to fix boreholes. For many committee members, it was the first time they had met colleagues from other villages in years, giving them the opportunity to take ownership of the infrastructure in their villages and reinforce existing social capital and professional networks.

These trainings also facilitated the connection between them, offering the opportunity to exchange knowledge and best practices. Water committees and officials received access to technologies such as a digital mapping system (via Monday.com) and new borehole repair kits, improving their access to new technology and offering better mapping resources to be used by authorities. 

Finally, the district administrations supported by IsraAID were left with additional supplies and repair kits, providing them with physical resources, and furthering their capacity to repair boreholes on their own in the future, relying also on IsraAID-trained water technicians in the villages.

Later on, based on the training and resources they received from IsraAID, as well as linking and renewing peer connections and relationships with district leadership, the intervention was able to scale up borehole rehabilitation efforts, reaching over a hundred sites within six months, all relying on local capacities that IsraAID supported into action. IsraAID’s approach which focused on strengthening social capital for community resilience, ensured that communities felt ownership and responsibility for their own boreholes, increasing the chances of maintaining them for the long term and not counting on external agents for support.

Almost a year after Cyclone Freddy and the initial response, IsraAID is still in Malawi, operating to rehabilitate even more boreholes, expand programs, and deepen our ties with local communities.

 

_{Assessment in the Phalombe district school - IsraAID emergency response in Malawi| Photo by Idan Markovich}

Concluding thoughts 
 

Enhancing, leveraging and supporting existing social capital sources within a community can strengthen its resilience to face and recover from disaster. Thus, combining the resources and capabilities within the community, together with those of external humanitarian organizations, through the lens of social capital can be a powerful mix. While positive results might occur, there are also potential setbacks to this approach. Certain criticisms doubt its effectiveness, arguing that it is a capitalist concept created by The World Bank & IMF, which ignores politics and power relations. Most importantly, strengthening SC by international organizations has been criticized for its potential to create inequality by excluding certain individuals and influencing social fabric. However, we argue that with limited resources, empowering local groups can be the best way to utilize local resources and create a sustainable impact. In addition, this approach allows local members to continue working independently as a collective, exactly like the capacity developed within the local water committees through their training.

Taking into account that emergency response requires quick and efficient solutions to ensure life-saving, human dignity, and health, the choice to focus on strengthening social capital can be impactful in the long term but hinder quick action in the immediate response phase. The balance between direct NGO implementation and working with and through local communities, especially in the early phases, can sometimes prove to be the key.