The usual argument in disaster research is that those with stronger social capital are more resilient; therefore, the socially vulnerable can be resilient. However, in the disaster literature, little attention has been paid to the reasons why the socially vulnerable develop social capital in the first place. This qualitative research explores reasons for the formation and avoidance of social capital in relation to linguistic minority immigrants and refugees in the 2010–2011 Canterbury and Tohoku disasters. Taking influence from Bourdieu, the argument is made that resilient individuals developed their multifaceted social capital due to the lack of other forms of capital and their specific needs in different contexts. However, contextualized social factors such as race, gender and class also influence others’ decision to avoid social capital. These reasons for not forming social capital in pre-/post-disaster can explain why some socially vulnerable were surprisingly resilient and others are further marginalized.

灾难研究中通常的论点是，那些拥有更强大社会资本的人更具韧性。因此，社会弱势群体可以具有韧性。但是，在灾难文献中，人们很少关注社会弱势群体首先发展社会资本的原因。这项定性研究探讨了在2010-2011年坎特伯雷和东北灾害中与语言少数群体移民和难民相关的社会资本形成和回避的原因。受到布迪厄（Bourdieu）的影响，有人认为，有韧性的个人由于缺乏其他形式的资本及其在不同情况下的特定需求而发展了其多方面的社会资本。但是，情境化的社会因素，例如种族，性别和阶级，也会影响他人避免社会资本的决定。