International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijdrr

The effect of social capital in mitigating drought impacts and

improving livability of Iranian rural households
Moslem Savari a, *, Hamed Eskandari Damaneh b, Hadi Eskandari Damaneh b
a Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University of Khuzestan, Mollasani, Iran
b Department of Reclamation of Arid and Mountainous Regions, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The improvement of rural households' livability in drought conditions has always been an impor-
Drought tant challenge for all countries, especially developing countries, because consecutive droughts
Livability have reduced the resilience of these households and may even inflict irreparable damages to rural
Social capital and agricultural communities if there are no systems in place for mitigating the risk of drought.
Sustainable livelihood
This research explored the effects of social capital on the livability of rural families in Iran. The
Iran
statistical population was composed of all rural-farmer families in Kerman province in the south-
east of Iran. The study site was selected based on the severity of droughts. The results show that
the studied households are not at an optimal level in livability indices and past droughts have se-
verely reduced their livability level. If no comprehensive plan is adopted for drought manage-
ment in the coming years, most villages in the southeast of Iran will be desolated. Furthermore, it
is revealed that the dimension of social capital (social awareness, participation and collective ac-
tion, membership in groups, social trust, and social participation) can account for 74.1% of the
variance in rural households' livability in drought conditions. In general, the results can provide
policymakers with new insights into how to supply conditions for the sustainability of rural fami-
lies’ livelihood in drought conditions.

1. Introduction
In recent years, the world has been faced with various climatic change, e.g., changes in the precipitation pattern, temperature, and
sea level [1]. IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report says that these changes will be aggravated in the future [2]. Climate change is threaten-
ing natural and human systems on a global scale [3]. Natural hazards like droughts and floods are related to global climate change
[4,5]. Natural disasters, which are recursive phenomena, may jeopardize the livelihood of human communities if there are no risk-
alleviation systems [6].
Among natural hazards, drought is one of the most complicated and unknown natural disasters [7] and is a gigantic threat to the
livability of human communities and natural ecosystems [8]. So far, various approaches have been applied to alleviate the conse-
quences of drought in rural communities, such as expanding the capacity of these communities, improving water allocation methods,
and developing approaches to adapting livelihood to drought [1]. However, the modern methods of natural disaster management
have put more emphasis on the connection among people and local communities for dealing with natural disasters [9]. Researchers
have understood that by connecting with one another, the resilience, livelihood, and livability of various communities can be im-
proved [10,11]. The connection of communities prevents stressful factors from imposing long-term impacts, so the human link is the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Savari).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103630
Received 31 October 2022; Received in revised form 2 March 2023; Accepted 5 March 2023
Available online 11 March 2023
2212-4209/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

best strategy to cope with climatic factors [12]. Researchers acknowledge that social capital functions as a strong supportive factor
during stresses and can promote livability in drought conditions (Fraser, 2021). Therefore, the improvement of people's social ties has
always been a major drought-coping strategy [13–15] because social capital is a key source that can help residents share physical, fi-
nancial, and social resources in drought conditions ([16,17]. Even in normal conditions, strong social networks can help the members
of a community to find jobs [18]. In drought conditions, social capital contributes to improving economic development [19], creating
motivation for progress [20], and improving health [21–23] and helps residents acquire the general commodities required from their
peers (Putnam, 1993). Undoubtedly, local communities can supply basic commodities through social relations and ties in critical con-
ditions [24]. Thus, social capital can alleviate negative events in life and can be useful for people at the time of life changes and chal-
lenges [25].
Accordingly, social capital seems to be necessary for achieving sustainable livability in rural communities in all regions because
livability without rural people's social capital would lead to inconsistency among social, economic, and ecological dimensions and
would entail vulnerability and weaken its trend in rural habitations [11]. In other words, the dimensions of social capital fuel ad-
vancement in the ecological, social, and economic environment in the rural livability process (Shortall, 2008). The dimensions and in-
dices of social capital, e.g., social awareness, trust, coherence, organization, cooperation, and networks, lay the ground for achieving
life facilities for livability [26].
Since Iran is located in the arid and semi-arid belt of the world, it has been struggling with drought for over two decades and now
the effects of these droughts are crystal clear [27]. Due to these consecutive droughts, the rural communities in this country are not in
a good condition, and significant parts of these communities abandon the rural areas and immigrate to urban areas every year [28].
Kerman province is located on the arid and semi-arid belt in the southeast of Iran. Its annual precipitation is less than 250 mm, and
over 80% of its area is influenced by the arid and semi-arid climate. The desert area of the province grows every year. This province is
located on the margins of Iran's deserts, and despite its environmental, agricultural, economic, and social dependence on water re-
sources, it has been influenced by droughts heavily [29]. Therefore, given that Kerman province is regarded as a dry region and farm-
ing is the main occupation of its residents, drought can influence the agriculture, economy, and livelihood of its people significantly
[30]. So, this research aimed to investigate the role of social capital in the livability of rural families in drought conditions in the
southeast of Iran. To achieve this goal, the following specific objectives were pursued.
• Studying the status of drought in the study site in years ((2000, 2010, and 2020)
• Studying the status of livability and social capital among rural families
• Analyzing the effects of social capital on the livability of rural families
• Compiling and proposing practical policies for improving the livability of rural families

1.1. Social capital

The term social capital was first used by Hanifan from West Virginia University in a paper before 1916. However, Jane Jacobs used
this term in his book in 1961 and meant that people living in the margins of the cities were characterized by the feature of building
good connections and links and forming groups that could solve their issues and problems [31]. Social capital is a set of social re-
sources that are dispersed within a community and are available. It is, also, regarded as a structural social resource that is formed of
some elements of a social structure and facilitates some actions for people living within that structure [32]. Social capital is the char-
acteristic of a group or network of social system actors. This method specifies how social actors are connected to other people and so-
cial groups [33]. Establishing connections among residents is crucial for the success of creating solidarity in a community [34,35].
Therefore, social capital is a relationship by which people can acquire shared values and norms, as well as trust, information, knowl-
edge, and resources, through social networks [36].
Here, we define social capital as social relationships and the ability of players (people, groups, or communities) to use these rela-
tionships for accessing financial, emotional, physical, and other resources to meet their needs for survival and improvement [37]. In
general, there are three types of social capital. The first type is bonding capital in which people are connected by similar social-
financial status and demographic characteristics (e.g., family, relatives, and kinship ties) [38]. These social groups are highly homo-
geneous, and it is argued that they facilitate immediate survival and early resilience of the intra-group members during disasters.
However, this type of social capital is criticized as it only deals with the group members and prevents the establishment of ties with
outside resources [39]. For example, after the tsunami of the Indian Ocean in 2004, some people in the south of India who were
deeply connected to their community did not observe the recovery measures, and consequently, the chance of resistance to disasters
decreased [40]. Also, the women and damaged people could not connect with other groups, so their relief was postponed [39]. The
second type of bridging capital that refers to people who have no family or kinship relationships but have similar financial status and
political influence [21]. The third is the linking capital which refers to inter-group ties and the vertical connection of people in au-
thority (owing to either their political influence or financial resources) with formal institutions, e.g., governmental organizations
[41]. For example, linking capital facilitated risk management in Japan [42,43] and relief distribution by non-governmental workers
in Nepal during disasters [44]. Research shows that NGOs play a key role in the distribution of public aid during disasters [41].
The main components of social capital include social awareness [45–48], social trust [11,25,30], social solidarity, social participa-
tion, social networks [34,26,30,36,44], and group membership i.e., membership in groups, institutions, associations, local institutes,
social organizations, cooperatives, and other associations, as well as participation in agricultural associations and group activities
[41,30,42,44].

2
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

1.2. Livability
Livability means the ability of a location to supply the material and non-material needs of its residents for enhancing life quality
[49]. Indeed, livability refers to a normative perspective to achieve pleasant life in which the government and people are involved
[50]. This perspective aims to change the current path and move toward a new and innovative plan for the future which would help
us accomplish an optimal future [11]. Therefore, a livable place is characterized by two features – the supply of proper livelihood and
ecological sustainability [51].
Livability encompasses a wide range of human needs, from food and security to aesthetics, cultural symbols, and community or lo-
cation belongingness [52]. Therefore, researchers have considered diverse indices for the assessment of livability. For example [11],
considered 12 indices in economic (employment and income, prosperity of agricultural activities, consuming commodities, housing
quality, and material welfare), social (sense of belongingness, personal and social security, solidarity of residents, esprit, and social in-
teraction), and environmental dimensions (pollution and landscape). Zhang Mao (2010) divided rural livability indices into five cate-
gories – material indices, educational indices, service and welfare facility indices, healthcare and medical service indices, and social
security. In a research study at Melbourne University, Australia, other indices were suggested for livability. They included crime and
security, housing, education, employment and income, social services, transportation, social sustainability, free time and culture,
food and local commodities, and the environment [53]. However, it should be considered when assessing livability that livability rep-
resents the best level of life quality which includes the standards of a good life. So, individual indices should be avoided, and the best
estimation of a location should be made by calculating composite indices (Murphy, 2010) because livability is composed of the three
interrelated dimensions of economic, social, and environmental (Balsaas, 2004). The economic dimension supplies occupations, in-
come, food, and housing requirements of rural families [54]. It can also supply other human needs, e.g., recreation and education
[55]. But, the social dimension mainly refers to the issues of fair distribution of resources and facilities [56], and the environmental
dimension deals with the relationship between the human being and the environment [57].

1.3. Social capital and the alleviation of the risk of disasters

The concept of social capital is rooted in the social relations of mankind and is, indeed, the product of human society [58–60]. It is
presently known that a community can achieve a high level of resilience during natural hazards through social capital [61]. In the
context of social capital, the factors that are highly important include, e.g., local cooperation between people and groups, local trust,
network-based development, and the adoption of institutional decisions by the community, which can be effective in the potential of
communities for hazard management and risk mitigation [62]. A modern way to reduce the risk of natural hazards, both before and
after their occurrence, is interpersonal cooperation using social capital, which can improve the status of the community [63]. These
cooperation's cover all dimensions from behavioral, mental, and emotional aspects to tangible actions. In fact, social capital is concep-
tualized as the cooperation and responsibility of a community's members as a key factor in reducing natural Hazards [64].
Therefore, social capital is composed of three complicated dimensions of structure, relationships, and communications and helps
improve management before, during, and after an incident by creating trust, interrelationships, group coherence, and cooperation
[65]. As such, unions and the relationships and social networks within a local community can play a vital role in raising the awareness
of residents before an incident, creating the capacity to cope with uncertainties during the incident, and efficiently mobilizing the
community after the incident [66]. In this regard, the local social system will be the rational and vital basis for all steps of the emer-
gency action, and certain mechanisms can lay the ground for the flow of information during the incident by increasing trust, aware-
ness, and individual and collective responsibility through strengthening the social network and social structure, thereby increasing
the efficiency of decisions within authorities, which is necessary for timely response to incidents [67].
In traditional communities, since the geographical realm is limited and people know one another, they cooperate to solve crises
spontaneously and voluntarily [68]. Therefore, social capital is a critical concept in critical conditions as it can guarantee to return to
normal conditions and exit the crisis [69]. During natural disasters, social capital allows communities to have easier access to re-
sources and information [63]. So, it can be said that social capital is an important factor that can increase social resilience during nat-
ural disasters [61]. In everyday practices, social relations can be a valuable source for creating and preserving resilience through such
mechanisms as risk sharing, interacting, and collective action [30]. Higher levels of intra-group social capital can lead to higher levels
of trust and more extensive shared norms within the community so that communities with higher levels of trust, norms, cooperation,
and networks are more capable of faster restoration from disasters [70]. For example, in a study on social capital, climate change, and
disaster management [71], investigated the role of trust, social norms, cooperation, and local social networks and reported the posi-
tive effect of social capital dimensions on reducing disaster effects through improving the ability of incident management to achieve
sustainable development. Also [72], studied disaster preparedness with social capital and community capacity in Japan and con-
cluded that social capital played a key role in preparing communities for natural disasters. In a study on the role of social capital in
improving the resilience of rural families in drought conditions, [73] concluded that resilience was higher in communities with
higher levels of social capital.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Calculation of meteorological drought in the study site
To select samples in drought conditions, the meteorological drought was calculated for 2000, 2010, and 2020 for which data pro-
vided by pluviometry stations (55 stations) of the Regional Water Organization (WRRO) were used. The meteorological drought was

3
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

calculated using SPI for all stations in the study site. SPI drought values were extracted using the MS Excel software package. In the
next step, the ArcGIS software suite was used to prepare the SPI-related zones. This index is described in detail below.

2.1.1. Meteorological drought index (SPI)

The index was proposed by McKee et al. (1995). This index is easy to understand and applicable to all conditions of water re-
sources. It is calculated as the difference of the precipitation from an average of a certain timeframe divided by the standard deviation
(Eq. (1)).

pi − pi
SPI = (1)
S

Where pi is annual precipitation of a particular year, pi the long-term mean annual precipitation, and S is the standard deviation of the
long-term rainfall record. Table 1 presents the classification of different drought states by the SPI method.

2.2. Sampling method

The target population was composed of rural-farming families in the counties of Kerman, Shahrebabak, Jiroft, Bardsir, Sirjan, and
Rudbar-e Jonubi; i.e., people who lived in villages and farming was their main job. The sample size was estimated by Kerjcie and Mor-
gan's (1970) table, and 395 heads of wheat-growing families were selected for the research. In this regard, since the drought severity
varied across the province, the SPI index was calculated to help with sampling. By this index, the counties were divided into three cat-
egories with extreme, very extreme, and critical drought severity (Fig. 1). Then, two counties with proper distribution were selected
from each region. Jiroft and Bardsir were selected from the extreme drought-exposed region, Kerman and Shahrebabak were selected
from the very extreme drought-exposed region, and Sirjan and Rudbar-e Jonub were selected from the critical drought-exposed re-
gion. In the third step, two districts from each county, two rural districts from each district, and two villages from each rural district
were selected for the research.

2.3. Survey instrument

The main research instrument was a questionnaire composed of three sections. Section (i) measured the rural families’ demo-
graphic and professional characteristics. Section (ii) included 27 items to measure the variable of social capital in which the dimen-
sions of social awareness, membership in groups, social integrity, social trust, and cooperation and collective action were measured
on a Likert scale from 1 for very low to 5 for very high (Table 2).
Section (iii) was related to the extraction and measurement of livability indices in drought conditions for which a literature review
was carried out in different databases including Elsevier, Springer, Taylor & Francis, and so on. The result was the identification of 66
indices to measure livability. Since these indices had been used in different communities, they were validated by five indices recom-
mended in the literature [74–76]; Savari et al., 2022) including suitability with the study site, dependence on drought conditions,
measurability, completeness, and applicability in order to customize them with the conditions of the studied region. Finally, only 17
indices were found to be appropriate for the measurement of economic, social, and environmental dimensions, which were opera-
tionalized in the questionnaire, and the remaining indices were excluded (Table 3). However, since the indices included in each di-
mension were not similar (7 indices for the economic dimension, 7 indices for the social dimension, and 3 indices for the environmen-
tal dimension), the analysis was made by a composite index to enhance the reliability and validity of the results. Since the indices dif-
fered in scales, they were first standardized by Eq. (2) provided by Eakin and Bojórquez-Tapia (2008) as follows:

SX − Smin
Index = (2)
Smax − Smin

in which SX represents the value of the target item and Smin and Smax represent its lowest and highest values, respectively. In the
next step, principal component analysis (PCA) was used to assign weights to the indices due to their different importance in livability
measurement. After the weights were determined for the five indices, a composite index was measured by Eq. (3).

Ʃ (𝐸𝑐𝑜1 × 𝑊 𝐸𝑐𝑜1) , … , (Eco7 × WEco7)

𝐸𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 =
7

Table 1
The classification of meteorological drought states by the SPI index (McKee et al., 1995).

Category Range Drought condition

0 + 2 ≤ SPI Acute wet

1 1.5 ≤ SPI < 2 Severely Wet
2 1 ≤ SPI < 1.5 Moderately Wet
3 − 1 ≤ SPI < + 1 Normal
4 − 1.5 ≤ SPI ≤ − 1 Very High
5 − 2 ≤ SPI < − 1.5 Extremely High
6 SPI < − 2 Critical

4
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

Fig. 1. The study area according to drought intensity (DI).

Table 2
The social capital components and items used to measure the variable of social capital.

Component Items Number Cronbach's

of items alpha

Group members Agricultural production cooperatives, financial credit and savings funds (rural microcredit funds, family funds, 5 0.88
etc.), water user associations/organizations (e.g., water user cooperatives), non-profit organizations, NGOs
Social solidarity The social integration of the villagers, the increase in the spirit of cooperation, the low level of social differences in 6 0.85
the village, the existence of family relationships among the villagers, socializing with the majority of the villagers,
active participation in celebrations in the village, active participation in the village public meetings, having a
cordial relationship with neighbors and other villagers
Social trust Lending money to friends and acquaintances during drought, lending agricultural equipment to friends and 6 0.92
acquaintances in drought conditions, accepting guarantees from friends and acquaintances, lending money to non-
relatives and strangers without receiving any documents, lending agricultural equipment to non-relatives and
strangers, trusting government officials such as agricultural experts, trusting meteorological information
Social awareness Sharing meteorological information, having information in the field of drought adaptation and coping strategies, 5 0.87
receiving more information in the field of livability through formal and informal mechanisms, sharing information
in the field of increasing the ability of farmers to adapt to drought, receiving information on livelihood
diversification
Participation and Participating in community capacity-building projects in drought conditions, consulting with other villagers in 5 0.77
collection implementing solutions to improve livability in drought conditions, helping others in agricultural work during
action drought, intellectual consultation and providing opinions for planning and implementing projects for dealing with
drought, mobilizing local communities to apply adaptation strategies
Sources: [45–48]; [11,25,26,30]; [34,36,44]; [41,42].

5
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

Table 3
The indicator used to measure livability.

Livability dimension Indicator PCA weight Variance accounted

Economic livability Job security 0.352 0.527

Income earning and enhancement 0.471
Reduction of dependence on the government 0.152
Material welfare 0.288
Food security 0.524
Standard and safe home 0.077
Investment 0.322
Social livability Solidarity of residents 0.557 0.628
Social security 0.488
Spatial belongingness and identity 0.625
Social vitality 0.327
Rural peace 0.427
Satisfaction with life 0.288
Reduced vulnerability to hazards 0.114
Environmental livability Low pollution 0.385 0.428
Natural landscape 0.327
Environmental quality 0.291
Sources: [8,11,54–57,77–80]; Gough, 2015; [43,81,82].

Ʃ (𝑆𝑜𝑐1 × 𝑊 𝑆𝑜𝑐1) , … , (Soc7 × WSoc7)

𝑆𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 =
7
Ʃ (𝐸𝑛𝑣1 × 𝑊 𝐸𝑛𝑣1) , … , (Env3 × WEnv3)
𝐸𝑛𝑣𝑖𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 =
3
Composite Index (CI) : Ʃ (Economical livability + 𝑆𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑙𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 + Environmental livability) (3)

In the third step, the integrated science data management (ISDM) index was used as follows to categorize and determine the
threshold value of livability (Gangadharappa et al., 2007):

Low ∶ A < mean – 1/2 SD

Moderate ∶ mean – 1/2 SD < B < mean + 1/2 SD

High ∶ C > mean + 1/2 SD (4)

2.4. Reliability and validity

To assess the overall validity of the studied indices, the draft of the opinion poll and questions was checked by a panel of experts
before proceeding to the interview with local communities. The panel was composed of professors in agricultural extension and edu-
cation, environmental science, psychology, social science, and agricultural science. Also, the reliability of the questionnaire was de-
termined with Cronbach's alpha (Table 2).

2.5. Data analysis

Data were analyzed both descriptively and inferentially using the SPSS software package. Multiple linear regression was used to
check the effects of the variables of social capital on the livability of rural families. This test is the most widely used method of multi-
variate analysis. In multiple linear regression, a linear relationship is established between the dependent variable and one or more in-
dependent variables. Among different methods of multiple linear regression, we used the stepwise method in which the variables are
included in the model one by one. Accordingly, the variables are entered into the regression model based on the capability of increas-
ing the coefficient of determination (R2). In this method, the variables are included in the model one by one until the significance
reaches 95%, i.e., an error level of 5%. Then, the operation is stopped [83].

3. Results
3.1. Demographic and professional characteristics of the studied rural families
According to the results, the participants were, on average, 38.47 years old (SD = 13.15 years). Most participants (249 people,
63.03%) were male, and the majority of them (30%) had high-school diplomas. Furthermore, the mean annual income of the rural
families was 615.8 million rials. Based on the results, 78% of the respondents acknowledged that drought had had significant effects
on the livability of rural families.

6
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

3.2. Studying the status of drought in the study site in years (2000, 2010, and 2020)
In this study, the whole study site was divided into three classes in 2020 to gain a clearer understanding of its status. According to
Figures (1), which depict the zonation of meteorological drought in Kerman province in 2000 (a), 2010 (b), and 2020 (c), respec-
tively, the drought has intensified in almost all parts of the province over time. In 2000, all regions experienced different types of wet
years (moderately wet, severely wet and normal drought), but a very high drought started to develop across the province in 2010.
However, a great part of the province from the east to the center has been subject to normal drought. In other words, the whole
province experienced normal drought in 2010 except for small parts in the south, west, and north where the drought was very high
drought. In 2010, very high drought was more in the southern part than in the western and northern regions. In 2020, a great part of
the province was struggling with an extremely high drought. The important point about the meteorological drought is that drought
has had an ascending trend in this region over the studied statistical period so that most parts of the province were under drought
(critical, very high, extremely high drought) in 2020. Over time, the area of the wet year class has shrunk. Also, we observed a de-
crease in drought intensity as moving from the south to the north, which can be attributed to the adjacency with the Zagros Range
with mountainous areas and high precipitation whereas the southern regions are mostly plains with a reduced rate of precipitation. In
general, the results of this indicator for the drought type revealed that a greater area of Kerman province has been subjected to
drought in recent years (2020).

3.3. Status of livability and social capital in drought conditions

The results of grouping the livability status and its components under drought conditions show that the livability of rural families
will decrease with increasing drought intensity. Furthermore, the results show that the economic sector is more damaged than the
other dimensions among the components of livability, implying that frequent droughts in the past have reduced the tolerance ad re-
silience level of rural families. If no comprehensive plan is developed to create capacity in them, they may completely abandon the
agricultural sector in the future (Table 4).
The results about the status of rural-farming families’ social capital reveal that the social capital level decreases with increasing
drought intensity. But, the results for the components of social capital at different drought intensities were different; that is, the levels
of cooperation and collective action, social integrity, and social trust decrease with increasing drought intensity, but the components
of social awareness and membership in groups do not show the same trend. It should, however, be noted that drought has had many
effects on these components because most families belong to the middle class (Table 5).

3.4. The relationship between drought intensity and livability of rural-farming families
The relationship between different drought intensities and the livability of rural families was studied by the coefficient of correla-
tion. Based on the results, there was a negative and significant relationship between them (Table 6).

3.5. Effects of social capital components on the livability of rural families

The research adopted multiple linear regression with the stepwise method to determine the effects of social capital components as
was already mentioned in the Methodology. Based on the results, all components were included in the regression model in five steps.
The results in Table 7 show that the variable of social awareness was first included in the model. Its multiple correlation coefficient
(R) was 0.757 and its coefficient of determination (R2) was 0.572. This means that 57.2% of the variance in the dependent variable
(the livability of rural households) was explained by this variable. In the second step, the variable of participation and collective ac-
tion was included in the equation, which increased R to 0.828 and R2 to 0.684. In other words, 11.2% of the variance in the dependent
variable (the livability of rural families) was accounted for by this variable. In the third step, group membership was included in the
equation. As a result, R and R2 were increased to 0.852 and 0.726, respectively. So, this variable captured 4.2% of the variance in the
dependent variable. Eventually, the variables of social trust and social participation, which were added to the equation in the fourth
and fifth steps, accounted for 1 and 0.5% of the variance in the livability of rural families in drought conditions, respectively. Accord-

Table 4
Status of livability in drought conditions.

Variables Status Very high Extremely high Critical

Bardsir (%) Jiroft (%) Shahrebabak (%) Kerman (%) Rudbar-e Jonubi (%) Sirjan (%)

General livability Low 23 18 28 26 36 39

Moderate 44 47 40 39 40 44
High 33 35 32 35 24 17
Economic livability Low 36 34 32 37 41 38
Moderate 41 48 52 43 44 55
High 23 18 16 20 15 7
Social livability Low 24 28 30 26 33 36
Moderate 53 44 46 48 49 51
High 23 28 24 26 18 13
Environmental livability Low 12 16 23 30 34 32
Moderate 55 60 42 54 49 52
High 33 24 35 16 17 16

7
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

Table 5
Status of social capital in drought conditions.

Variables Status Very high Extremely high Critical

Bardsir (%) Jiroft (%) Shahrebabak (%) Kerman (%) Rudbar-e Jonubi (%) Sirjan (%)

General social capital Low 25 23 27 24 29 33

Moderate 33 43 46 52 51 46
High 42 34 27 24 20 21
Social integrity Low 21 19 24 22 26 23
Moderate 50 46 47 51 55 58
High 29 35 29 27 19 19
Cooperation and collective action Low 12 16 23 19 29 26
Moderate 52 49 46 58 51 56
High 36 35 31 23 20 18
Social trust Low 16 16 23 24 27 12
Moderate 55 57 52 52 57 66
High 29 27 25 24 16 22
Social awareness Low 18 12 18 16 17 13
Moderate 37 48 39 41 52 44
High 45 40 43 33 31 43
Membership in groups Low 13 18 12 16 9 17
Moderate 55 46 61 52 55 48
High 32 36 27 32 36 35

Table 6
The relationship between livability dimensions and drought intensity.

Resilience dimensions Correlation value Significance level

- Economic livability −0.552 0.001

- Social livability −0.241 0.001
- Environmental livability −0.234 0.001
- General livability −0.388 0.001

Table 7
The results of multiple regression.

Step Predictor R R2 F Sig.

1 Social awareness 0.757 0.572 508.750 0.001

2 Participation and collective action 0.827 0.684 410.701 0.001
3 Group membership 0.852 0.726 334.573 0.001
4 Social trust 0.858 0.736 262.162 0.001
5 Social participation 0.861 0.741 215.048 0.001

ing to the results, the five components of social capital could account for 74.1% of the variance in livability in drought conditions
(R2 = 0.741) and the remaining 25.9% is related to other factors that were not recognized in this research.
According to Table 8 and the B values of the social capital components, the regression equation was obtained as follows:

Y = −0.715 + 0.911X1 + 0.645X2 + 0.405X3 + 0.259X4 + 0.149X5

The significance of the F-test and t-test shows the significance of the regression equation and the fit of the regression model. How-
ever, the regression equation does not reveal anything about the relative significance of the independent variables in predicting the
variance in the dependent variable. The beta value is used to determine the relative importance of the independent variables in pre-
dicting the dependent variable. This statistic shows the effect of each independent variable on the dependent variable independent of
the effect of other independent variables. Accordingly, the most influential component of social capital on the dependent variable

Table 8
The results of multiple regressions.

Predictor B Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF

Constant −0.715 – −0.605 0.0001 –

Social awareness (X1) 0.911 0.379 10.111 0.0001 0.477 1.968
Participation and collective action (X2) 0.645 0.372 10.152 0.0001 0.493 2.028
Group membership (X3) 0.405 0.166 4.734 0.0001 0.557 1.795
Social trust (X4) 0.259 0.142 3.943 0.0001 0.529 1.890
Social participation (X5) 0.149 0.076 2.787 0.0001 0.921 1.068

8
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

(livability in drought conditions) was social awareness with a beta value of 0.379. This means that one unit of change in the deviation
of social awareness can change the SD of the dependent variable (livability in drought conditions) by 0.379 units. The least influential
component was found to be social participation with a beta value of 0.076.
In an ideal model, the independent variables should not be interrelated, which is known as the issue of multicollinearity. To check
this issue, the two statistics of variance inflation factor (VIF) and tolerance index should be calculated. If VIF is > 10 and the toler-
ance index is close to zero, it can be said that the research variables are subject to multicollinearity [83]. Table 6 displays that the tol-
erance index and VIF have ideal values, so the regression model of the research is highly fit and the results are reliable.

4. Discussion
This research investigated the role of social capital in the livability of rural families in Iran. The literature review shows that this
topic has not been explored seriously yet and past research on the livability of rural families has focused on economic factors and has
underestimated the role of social factors (Sharafi et al., 2021). Therefore, in addition to reducing the gap in the literature, this re-
search pursued three goals: (i) studying the status of social capital and livability in the southeast of Iran as a region prone to drought,
(ii) analyzing the effects of social capital on livability, and (iii) compiling applied policies for alleviating the effects of drought. There-
fore, in addition to providing policymakers with novel insight, the research can help other regions of the world that are faced with the
issue of drought.
The results showed that the studied families were not in good status in livability. This finding agrees with the results reported by
Ref. [11]. According to the results, rural families are more prone to drought than urban families due to the high dependence of their
livelihoods on farming and ranching [84–86]. Drought disturbs their crop production cycle [87,88]. Frequent droughts have reduced
the livelihood resilience of rural families and have challenged their livability in drought conditions [89–91]; Savar et al., 2022c). As a
result, developing countries like Iran are faced with the severe problem of immigration from rural areas to urban areas, which will re-
sult in the extensive desolation of rural areas [92]. The withdrawal of farmers from the agricultural sector can be a grave issue and
threaten food security in all societies [93]. On the other hand, since farmers in developing countries mostly own small pieces of land
and are the so-called smallholders, they are more vulnerable to the effects of drought. These farmers who are less dependent on the
agricultural sector leave this production sector as soon as the impacts of drought appear [61]. Consequently, an important problem
for farmers in developing countries in drought conditions is the low level of their resilience, which reduces their livability in these
conditions as is the case in Iran (Zarafshani et al., 2012). So, farmers in these countries, including Iran, are highly unstable in drought
conditions.
The results showed that the components of social capital could account for 74% of the variance in the livability of rural families in
drought conditions. This is consistent with the results of [94]; Shortall (2008), [26,95]; Xiao et al. (2020), Cahyo (2019). According to
this finding, social capital is a positive feature of society that can pave the way for increasing the productivity of human, economic,
and physical capital if applied and can therefore reduce environmental problems for people (Richard, 2018). Therefore, social capital,
social solidarity, and social participation are unique constructs that can contribute to the development of societies and interventions
for improving livability in stressful conditions [96]. Previous research shows that social capital has material and social advantages
arising from interpersonal relationships within and between groups and can reduce immigration [94]. Social capital extensively helps
achieve mechanisms and arrangements, such as cooperation and accountability in rural residential areas (Uphoff, 2016) and lays the
ground for the formation of rural associations and institutions (Shortall, 2008; [95]. Furthermore, social capital can be effective in in-
creasing creativity and innovation and provide conditions for diversifying livelihood in drought conditions [91]. In this regard, social
capital is a basic pillar for the improvement of rural livability and the cooperation of rural people [97]. The improvement of social
capital dimensions including awareness, trust, solidarity, social associations, networks of social relations, and social participation can
help the development of rural livability (Xiao et al., 2020; Cahyo, 2019).
The most influential component of social capital for enhancing the livability of rural families in drought conditions is social aware-
ness. This variable has been emphasized by other researchers, too [41]; Xiao et al., 2020; Cahyo, 2019; [46,47]. Knowledge can be
shared by formal networks and mechanisms, e.g., newsletters, and informal mechanisms, e.g., verbal communications. Knowledge
sharing is a major advantage of social capital [45–47]. Knowledge sharing may be increased by more diversity of networks and/or
more trust in information resources [48]. Increasing knowledge and awareness can greatly help the livability of rural families in three
ways. Firstly, most rural families are not highly educated and some are even illiterate. So, they are unaware of drought-adapting
strategies and drought can have greater impacts on them. Secondly, farmers' beliefs and attitudes can be changed, so they can allevi-
ate drought effects by using indigenous and modern knowledge, thereby promoting livability in drought conditions. Thirdly, increas-
ing farmers’ awareness of the negative effects of drought in the long run can motivate them to cooperate in capacity-building and
drought-coping schemes to a greater extent. However, most rural families in developing countries do not typically intend to change
their farming practices in drought conditions and are mostly fatalists, so they attribute drought and its effects to metaphysical factors
and do not accept to change their farming practices (Zarafshani et al., 2012). Therefore, social awareness can facilitate knowledge
learning, transfer, and sharing and can change some beliefs about drought through interaction [98].
The second most effective component of social capital is participation and collective action, emphasized by others[30,44] in
stressful conditions, too. This concept is realized as the social capability and capacity to cope with disasters. In other words, it refers to
the local ability to respond to, counteract, and adapt to change through collective action as the capacity of the social system for gath-
ering around a common goal (livability in drought conditions). Most farmers in different countries believe that when projects to cope
with drought or other natural disasters are implemented, they usually fail to involve them effectively, so most capacity-building pro-
jects are not aligned with farmers' needs [61]. Nonetheless, a factor that is important in drought management is to raise awareness of

9
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

the conditions and create a climate of counteraction among people. So, meetings and briefing sessions should be held to create a cli-
mate for coping with drought among people. Also, by involving people in water-saving projects and stopping water-intensive activi-
ties, the comprehensive programs of drought suppression can succeed. It can, therefore, be said that most strategies for managing
droughts and increasing farmers' livelihood depend on collective morale and the tendency of rural people toward cooperation as indi-
vidual activities cannot help the livability of rural families [11]. For example, Zwiers et al. (2016) found that individual actions for
coping with drought would fail. Furthermore, Hernandez (2010) reported that mobilizing local people for coping with drought could
improve farmers' mental capacity for drought management and help the alignment of project goals with people's needs. In general, it
can be claimed that methods for coping with drought and increasing livability are influenced by temporal and spatial conditions. Con-
sequently, the participation of local communities can promote the effectiveness of capacity-building programs.
Group membership is the third most important component of social capital for the improvement of livability among rural families.
The importance of this component in stressful conditions has been mentioned by [41,30,42,44], too. Membership in social groups can
enhance the livability of rural-farmer families in two ways. First, social groups lay the ground for the exchange of knowledge and
awareness among farmers. In fact, farmers in these groups will discuss drought issues and identify the best approach by collective wis-
dom. Secondly, most social groups, like microcredit funds, have economic nature and are formed by farmers who put together their
little investments. Therefore, these funds can contribute to creating income-generating activities for farmers, so they can lessen the
negative impacts of drought [61]. Therefore, farmers' membership in social groups can be an essential measure for drought manage-
ment. For example [99], state that groups that are formed by shared norms are more capable of dealing with drought because they are
a valuable source for sharing information on drought-coping methods. Thus, most social groups can help increase people's participa-
tion and use their indigenous knowledge because social groups can make farmers more effective in governmental decisions and can
allow them to interfere with capacity-building projects.
The fourth component that influences the livability of rural families is social trust as reported by others, too [34,26,30,36,44].
This finding can be explained by the fact that since in drought conditions, the environment cannot meet the needs of farmers, they are
more dependent on one another in these conditions and can meet each other's needs, which is plausible by establishing connections
based on social trust. [73] assert that trust will increase farmers' resilience in rural communities because the two practices of trade or
barter and financial aid are more prevalent in these communities. When their relationships are based on trust, they immigrate to a
lesser extent and show a stronger sense of belongingness.
Finally, the last component of social capital that is effective in improving livability in drought conditions is social solidarity. This
corroborates the results reported by [30,44,100]. It can be noted that increasing social capital in rural residential areas enhances so-
cial trust and solidarity among people and groups and improves their livability [101]. Some research in various countries, e.g.,
Canada, India, and Thailand, emphasizes that the preservation of social solidarity in drought-coping projects and plans will improve
rural people's self-confidence and livability [102]. Therefore, the dimensions of social capital and thereby the dimensions of sustain-
able rural livability can be promoted by establishing small associations, groups, and centers at the rural level and holding group activ-
ities by rural managers, as well as the greater participation of rural people.
Drawing on the results, the following three general policies are proposed to help policymakers improve the livability of rural-
farming families.
(1) Improving social awareness. Since social awareness was the most important component of social capital in influencing the
improvement of the livability of rural families, it is recommended to hold educational workshops and courses for farmers on
drought-coping strategies and livelihood improvement methods to inform them about the latest adaptation strategies and the
importance of their adoption in drought conditions.
(2) Establishing social associations. Since the results revealed that membership in social associations was an important component
of social capital and influenced the livability of rural families, policymakers are suggested to develop rural associations and
motivate farmers to join them as it would contribute to the development of social capital.
(3) Raising the capacity of non-governmental organizations and associations. Cooperation and collective actions are major
components of social capital. On the other hand, experience in developed and developing countries shows that non-
governmental organizations are essential for the success of cooperative approaches in development programs. So, the
government should focus on developing and strengthening local independent organizations. They can, then, act as a pathway
for providing people with the developmental services of the government during droughts and can actively contribute to
designing, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating drought-coping activities.

5. Conclusions and limitations

The research aimed to study the effect of social capital on improving the livability of rural-farming families in Kerman province in
the southeast of Iran. Based on the results, over 70% of rural-farming families are living in drought conditions. Furthermore, the re-
sults show that the livability of rural families varies with drought intensity. The higher the drought intensity, the lower the livability
level. Also, the correlation coefficient revealed a negative significant relationship between drought intensity and livability.
Despite its important results, the research was suffering from three limitations. First, The first and maybe the most important limi-
tation of the research was drought data because pluvimetry stations are typically new in Iran and those that are older are not usually
accurate enough. Second, the research only focused on social capital. Future research can consider other factors such as economic, hu-
man, and psychological factors in addition to social capital. Third, since drought effects on livability are influenced by time and place,
the results must be generalized to other regions cautiously.

10
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.

Acknowledgments
The current paper is adapted from a research assigned in Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University of Khuzestan,
with a Grant Number of 1401.20, and financially supported by the university, thereby we declare our appreciation for their help.

References
[1] H. Farahani, M. Jahansoozi, Analysis of rural households’ resilience to drought in Iran, case study: bajestan County, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 82 (2022)
103331.
[2] X. Huang, H. Li, X. Zhang, X. Zhang, Land use policy as an instrument of rural resilience–The case of land withdrawal mechanism for rural homesteads in
China, Ecol. Indicat. 87 (2018) 47–55.
[3] M. Savari, H.E. Damaneh, H.E. Damaneh, Factors involved in the degradation of mangrove forests in Iran: a mixed study for the management of this
ecosystem, J. Nat. Conserv. 66 (2022) 126153.
[4] N. Bandyopadhyay, C. Bhuiyan, A.K. Saha, Drought mitigation: critical analysis and proposal for a new drought policy with special reference to Gujarat
(India), Progress in Disaster Science 5 (2020) 100049.
[5] H. Eskandari Damaneh, H. Khosravi, K. Habashi, H. Eskandari Damaneh, J.P. Tiefenbacher, The impact of land use and land cover changes on soil erosion in
western Iran, Nat. Hazards (2022) 1–21.
[6] M. Savari, F. Naghibeiranvand, Z. Asadi, Modeling environmentally responsible behaviors among rural women in the forested regions in Iran, Global Ecology
and Conservation 35 (2022) e02102.
[7] L. Sharafi, K. Zarafshani, M. Keshavarz, H. Azadi, S. Van Passel, Drought risk assessment: towards drought early warning system and sustainable environment
in western Iran, Ecol. Indicat. 114 (2020) 106276.
[8] P. Wang, W. Qiao, Y. Wang, S. Cao, Y. Zhang, Urban drought vulnerability assessment–A framework to integrate socio-economic, physical, and policy index in
a vulnerability contribution analysis, Sustain. Cities Soc. 54 (2020) 102004.
[9] S.C. Pendley, N.B. Mock, K.P. Theall, How you measure matters; defining social capital in drought-prone areas, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 50 (2020) 101715.
[10] M.S. Akbar, D.P. Aldrich, Social capital’s role in recovery: evidence from communities affected by the 2010 Pakistan floods, Disasters 42 (3) (2018) 475–497.
[11] M. Savari, M. Moradi, The effectiveness of drought adaptation strategies in explaining the livability of Iranian rural households, Habitat Int. 124 (2022)
102560.
[12] International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), World, Disasters Report, 2016 Lyon, France, 2016.
[13] D.P. Aldrich, M.A. Meyer, Social capital and community resilience, Am. Behav. Sci. 59 (2) (2015) 254–269.
[14] D.K. Yoon, J.E. Kang, S.D. Brody, A measurement of community disaster resilience in Korea, J. Environ. Plann. Manag. 59 (3) (2016) 436–460.
[15] K. Smiley, J. Howell, J. Elliot, Disasters, local organizations, and poverty in the USA, 1998 to 2015, Popul. Environ. 40 (2) (2018) 115–135.
[16] D.P. Aldrich, Black Wave: How Connections and Governance Shaped Recovery from Japan’s 3.11 Disasters, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2019.
[17] M. Woolcock, The rise and routinization of social capital, 1988–2008, Annual Rev. Pol.Sci. 13 (2010) 469–487.
[18] M.S. Granovetter, The strength of weak ties, Am. J. Sociol. 78 (6) (1973) 1360–1380.
[19] M. Woolcock, Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework, Theor. Soc. 27 (1998) 151–208.
[20] J.S. Coleman, Social capital in the creation of human capital, Am. J. Sociol. 94 (1988) 95–120.
[21] S. Szreter, M. Woolcock, Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health, Int. J. Epidemiol. 33 (4) (2004)
650–667.
[22] I. Kawachi, Social capital for health and human development, Development 44 (2001) 31–35.
[23] D.P. Aldrich, C. Page-Tan, T. Fraser, A Janus-faced resource: social capital and resilience trade-offs, in: B.D. Trump, M.-V. Florin, I. Linkov (Eds.), IRGC
Resource Guide on Resilience, Domains of Resilience for Complex Interconnected Systems, vol. 2, EPFL International Risk Governance Center, Lausanne, CH,
2018.
[24] Ludovico Alcorta, Jeroen Smits, Haley J. Swedlun, de Jong, Eelke, The ‘dark side’ of social capital: a cross- national examination of the relationship between
social capital and violence in africa, Soc. Indicat. Res. 149 (2020) 445–465.
[25] Y. Hua, F. Dong, J. Goodman, How to leverage the role of social capital in pro-environmental behavior: A case study of residents’ express waste recycling
behavior in China, J. Clean. Product. 280 (2021) 124376.
[26] L. Schmaal, E. Pozzi, T. C Ho, L.S. Van Velzen, I.M. Veer, N. Opel, D.J. Veltman, ENIGMA MDD: seven years of global neuroimaging studies of major
depression through worldwide data sharing, Translat. Psychiatry 10 (1) (2020) 172.
[27] F. Delfiyan, M. Yazdanpanah, M. Forouzani, J. Yaghoubi, Farmers’ adaptation to drought risk through farm–level decisions: the case of farmers in Dehloran
county, Southwest of Iran, Clim. Dev. 13 (2) (2021) 152–163.
[28] M. Savari, H.E. Damaneh, H.E. Damaneh, Drought vulnerability assessment: solution for risk alleviation and drought management among Iranian farmers,
Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 67 (2022) 102654.
[29] M. Savari, M. Zhoolideh, The role of climate change adaptation of small-scale farmers on the household’s food security level in the west of Iran, Dev. Pract. 31
(5) (2021) 650–664.
[30] M. Savari, M. Shokati Amghani, Factors influencing farmers’ adaptation strategies in confronting the drought in Iran, Environ. Dev. Sustain. 23 (4) (2021)
4949–4972.
[31] S. Lloyd, The Role of Social Capital in Improved Cookstove Adoption in Lusaka, Zambia, Doctoral dissertation), 2021, pp. 1–41.
[32] L. Qiu, W. Zeng, S. Kant, S. Wang, The role of social capital in rural households’ perceptions toward the benefits of forest carbon sequestration projects:
evidence from a rural household survey in sichuan and yunnan provinces, China, Land 10 (2) (2021) 91.
[33] P. Angelstam, M. Fedoriak, F. Cruz, J. Munoz-Rojas, T. Yamelynets, M. Manton, A. Zhuk, Meeting places and social capital supporting rural landscape
stewardship, A Pan-European horizon scanning 26 (1) (2021) 86.
[34] I.G.P. Nugraha, I.M. Antara, M. Budiarsa, S.A. Paturusi, The role of social capital in serangan sub-district, Denpasar-Bali, J. Tourism 8 (1) (2021) 59–64.
[35] M. Savari, M. Eslami, F. Monavarifard, The impact of social capital on agricultural employees’ job satisfaction, city of Divandarreh, Int. Res. J. Appl. Basic Sci.
4 (2) (2013) 291–295.
[36] H. El Zahed, M. Habib, Social Capital & Water Conservation Behavior Among University Students in Egypt, 2020, pp. 152–170 2020.
[37] P. Bourdieu, L.J. Wacquant, An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, University of Chicago press, 1992.
[38] S. Szreter, M. Woolcock, Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health: point-Counterpoint, in: The Ethics of
Public Health, Routledge, 2018, pp. 477–494.
[39] M. Leonard, Bonding and bridging social capital: reflections from Belfast, Sociology 38 (5) (2004) 927–944.

11
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

[40] A. Joshi, M. Aoki, The role of social capital and public policy in disaster recovery: a case study of Tamil Nadu State, India, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 7 (2014)
100–108.
[41] S. Panday, S. Rushton, J. Karki, J. Balen, A. Barnes, The role of social capital in disaster resilience in remote communities after the 2015 Nepal earthquake,
Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 55 (2021) 102112.
[42] K. Kawamoto, K. Kim, Efficiencies of bonding, bridging and linking social capital: cleaning up after disasters in Japan, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 33 (2019)
64–73.
[43] M. Shahpasand, V. Sarani, M. Savari, The impact of social capital on the quality of life for farmers in Divandarreh County, Iran. J. Agric. Econ. Dev. Res. 48 (3)
(2017) 431–441.
[44] Z. Hillig, J. Connell, Social capital in a crisis: NGO responses to the 2015 Nepalese earthquakes, Asia Pac. Viewp. 59 (3) (2018) 309–322.
[45] H. Chen, J. Wang, J. Huang, Policy support, social capital, and farmers’ adaptation to drought in China, Global Environ. Change 24 (2014) 193–202.
[46] T.J. King, D. Ooi, J. Cary, A. Fisher, R. Schibeci, K. Murphy, J.A. Donaldson, Public Perceptions of, and Responses to, Desalination in Australia: A Report on
Findings, Alfred Deakin Research Institute, 2012.
[47] Y. Lu, D. Ruan, G. Lai, Social capital and economic integration of migrants in urban China, Soc. Network. 35 (3) (2013) 357–369.
[48] N.F. Martini, K.C. Nelson, M.E. Dahmus, Exploring homeowner diffusion of yard care knowledge as one step toward improving urban ecosystems, Environ.
Manag. 54 (5) (2014) 1223–1236.
[49] M. Alinaghipour, I. Pourramzan, N. Molaei Hashjin, Explaining environmental livability of rural settlements around rasht metropolis, Human Geography Res.
53 (1) (2021) 1–22.
[50] M. Kashef, Urban livability across disciplinary and professional boundaries, Front. Architect. Res. 5 (2) (2016) 239–253.
[51] J.D. Chazal, A systems approach to livability and sustainability: defining terms and mapping relationships to link desires with ecological opportunities and
constraints, Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 27 (5) (2010) 585–597.
[52] National research council, Community and Quality of Life. Data Needs for Informed Decision Making, National academy press, Washington, 2002.
[53] M. Lowe, C. Whitzman, H. Badland, M. Davern, D. Hes, L. Aye, W. Giles-Corti, Liveable, Healthy, Sustainable: what Are the Key Indicators for Melbourne
Neighbourhoods? Department of Health and Human Services, 2013.
[54] A. Paul, J. Sen, Livability assessment within a metropolis based on the impact of integrated urban geographic factors (IUGFs) on clustering urban centers of
Kolkata, Cities 74 (2018) 142–150.
[55] C.J. Balsas, Measuring the livability of an urban centre: an exploratory study of key performance indicators, Plann. Pract. Res. 19 (1) (2004) 101–110.
[56] N.M. Dali, A. Abdullah, R. Islam, Prioritization of the indicators and subindicators of Maqasid alshariah in measuring liveability of cities, Int. J. Analytic
Hierarchy Process 10 (3) (2018), 348371 Article.
[57] Y. Wang, Y. Zhu, M. Yu, Evaluation and determinants of satisfaction with rural livability in China’s less-developed eastern areas: a case study of Xianju
County in Zhejiang Province, Ecol. Indicat. 104 (2019) 711–722.
[58] W. Li, X. Hua, The value of family social capital in informal financial markets: evidence from China, Pac. Basin Finance J. 77 (2023) 101922.
[59] N. Valizadeh, K. Sadeghi Shahrnoy, M. Bijani, D. Hayati, Z. Hallaj, H. Azadi, Towards conserving wetlands: application of the social identity model of
collective action, Land Degrad. Dev. 33 (18) (2022) 3703–3717.
[60] M. Shariatzadeh, M. Bijani, Towards farmers’ adaptation to climate change: the effect of time perspective, J. Clean. Prod. 348 (2022) 131284.
[61] M. Savari, M.S. Amghani, SWOT-FAHP-TOWS analysis for adaptation strategies development among small-scale farmers in drought conditions, Int. J.
Disaster Risk Reduc. 67 (2022) 102695.
[62] V. Narain, Social capital and disaster risk reduction in a periurban context, in: Disaster Resilience and Sustainability, Elsevier, 2021, pp. 651–665.
[63] S. Sanyal, J.K. Routray, Social capital for disaster risk reduction and management with empirical evidences from Sundarbans of India, Int. J. Disaster Risk
Reduc. 19 (2016) 101–111.
[64] D. Kos, R. Lensink, M. Meuwissen, The role of social capital in adoption of risky versus less risky subsidized input supplies: an empirical study of cocoa farmers
in Ghana, J. Rural Stud. 97 (2023) 140–152.
[65] J. Chia, Engaging communities before an emergency: developing community capacity through social capital investment, Aust. J. Emerg. Manag. 25 (1) (2010)
18–22.
[66] R.B. Bhandari, N. Okada, M. Yokomatsu, H. Ikeo, Building a disaster resilient community through ritual based social capital: a brief analysis of findings from
the case study of Kishiwada, Annuals of Disaster Prevention, Kyoto Univ. B 53 (B) (2010) 137–148.
[67] R.R. Dynes, Community Social Capital as the Primary Basis for Resilience, 2005.
[68] T. Fetzer, L. Hensel, J. Hermle, C. Roth, Coronavirus perceptions and economic anxiety, Rev. Econ. Stat. (2020) 1–36.
[69] D.M. Dave, D. McNichols, J.J. Sabia, Political Violence, Risk Aversion, and Non-localized Disease Spread: Evidence from the US Capitol Riot (No. W28410),
National Bureau of Economic Research, 2021.
[70] A. Joshi, M. Aoki, The role of social capital and public policy in disaster recovery: a case study of Tamil Nadu State, India, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 7 (2014)
100–108.
[71] R. Shaw, Y. Nakagawa, Social Capital, Climate Change and Disaster Management, World Conference on Disaster Reduction, 18-22 January 2005, Kobe,
Hyogo, Japan, Reg, No. PS001, 2005.
[72] J. Mimaki, R. Shaw, Enhancement of disaster preparedness with social capital and community capacity: a perspective from a comparative case study of rural
communities in Kochi, Japan, SUISUI Hydrological Research Letters 1 (2007) 5–10.
[73] M. Savari, A. Abdeshahi, Analysis of the role of social capital to improve the resilience of rural households in drought conditions in the county of Divandarreh,
J. Rural Res. 10 (2) (2019) 214–229.
[74] Y.J. Lee, C.M. Huang, Sustainability index for taipei, Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 27 (6) (2007) 505–521.
[75] F. Li, X. Liu, D. Hu, R. Wang, W. Yang, D. Li, D. Zhao, Measurement indicators and an evaluation approach for assessing urban sustainable development: a
case study for China’s Jining City, Landsc. Urban Plann. 90 (3–4) (2009) 134–142.
[76] Y.T. Huang, T.C. Pan, J.J. Kao, Performance assessment for municipal solid waste collection in Taiwan, J. Environ. Manag. 92 (4) (2011) 1277–1283.
[77] M. Savari, A.S. Mombeni, H. Izadi, Socio-psychological determinants of Iranian rural households’ adoption of water consumption curtailment behaviors, Sci.
Rep. 12 (1) (2022) 13077.
[78] M. Savari, Explaining the ranchers’ behavior of rangeland conservation in western Iran, Front. Psychol. 13 (2022).
[79] M. Savari, B. Khaleghi, Application of the extended theory of planned behavior in predicting the behavioral intentions of Iranian’s local communities toward
forest conservation, Front. Psychol. 14 (2023) 33.
[80] H. Badland, C. Whitzman, M. Lowe, M. Davern, L. Aye, I. Butterworth, B. Giles-Corti, Urban liveability: emerging lessons from Australia for exploring the
potential for indicators to measure the social determinants of health, Soc. Sci. Med. 111 (2014) 64–73.
[81] K. Huang, N. Sim, Adaptation may reduce climate damage in agriculture by two thirds, J. Agric. Econ. 72 (1) (2021) 47–71.
[82] P. Dorward, H. Osbahr, C. Sutcliffe, R. Mbeche, Supporting climate change adaptation using historical climate analysis, Clim. Dev. 12 (5) (2020) 469–480.
[83] N. Shiri, Attitude toward organic agribusiness: an approach to developing sustainable business, Br. Food J. 123 (10) (2021) 3265–3276.
[84] M. Palosaari, Vulnerability to Climate Change: Gender Analysis of Smallholder Farmers’ Contextual Vulnerability: a Case Study in Taita Hills, 2019.
[85] S. Li, L. Juhász-Horváth, P.A. Harrison, L. Pinter, M.D. Rounsevell, Relating farmer’s perceptions of climate change risk to adaptation behaviour in Hungary,
J. Environ. Manag. 185 (2017) 21–30.
[86] P.T. Thanh, Impact of climate change to women exacerbated by gender inequality: a case study of Lao cai. KKU, Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 9 (2) (2019) 118–147.
[87] G. Feola, A.M. Lerner, M. Jain, M.J.F. Montefrio, K.A. Nicholas, Researching farmer behavior in climate change adaptation and sustainable agriculture:
lessons learned from five case studies, J. Rural Stud. 39 (2015) 74–84.
[88] L. Yung, N. Phear, A. DuPont, J. Montag, D. Murphy, Drought adaptation and climate change beliefs among working ranchers in Montana, Weather, Climate,
and Society 7 (4) (2015) 281–293.
[89] J.G. Arbuckle Jr, L.W. Morton, J. Hobbs, Understanding farmer perspectives on climate change adaptation and mitigation: the roles of trust in sources of

12
M. Savari et al. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 89 (2023) 103630

climate information, climate change beliefs, and perceived risk, Environ. Behav. 47 (2) (2015) 205–234.
[90] C.P. Mubaya, J. Njuki, E.P. Mutsvangwa, F.T. Mugabe, D. Nanja, Climate variability and change or multiple stressors? Farmer perceptions regarding threats to
livelihoods in Zimbabwe and Zambia, J. Environ. Manag. 102 (2012) 9–17.
[91] M. Setini, N.N.K. Yasa, I.W. Gede Supartha, I.G.A. Ketut Giantari, I. Rajiani, The passway of women entrepreneurship: starting from social capital with open
innovation, through to knowledge sharing and innovative performance, J. Open Innov.: Technology, Market, and Complexity 6 (2) (2020) 25.
[92] M. Savari, M. Yazdanpanah, D. Rouzaneh, Factors affecting the implementation of soil conservation practices among Iranian farmers, Sci. Rep. 12 (1) (2022)
8396.
[93] C. Liao, H. Yu, W. Zhu, Perceived knowledge, coping efficacy and consumer consumption changes in response to food recall, Sustainability 12 (7) (2020)
2696.
[94] A.M. Leddy, H.J. Whittle, J. Shieh, C. Ramirez, I. Ofotokun, S.D. Weiser, Exploring the role of social capital in managing food insecurity among older women
in the United States, Soc. Sci. Med. 265 (2020) 113492.
[95] R.J. Simpson, Extracellular vesicles in cancer—implications for future improvements in cancer care, Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15 (10) (2018) 617–638.
[96] M. Kaiser, S. Barnhart, S. Huber-Krum, Measuring social cohesion and social capital within the context of community food security: a confirmatory factor
analysis, J. Hunger Environ. Nutr. 15 (5) (2020) 591–612.
[97] J. Dunkley, M. Ellis, T. Bolger, S. Iannello, P. Greenslade, G. Palmer, I.D. Clark, Unusual caves and karst-like features in sandstone and conglomerate in
Thailand, Helictite 43 (2017) 15–31.
[98] T. Kim, S. Lee, Social capital, knowledge sharing and organizational performance: what structural relationship do they have in hotels? Int. J. Contemporary
Hospitality 25 (5) (2013) 683–704.
[99] J. Dixon, A. Gulliver, D. Gibbon, Farming Systems and Poverty: Improvement Farmers’ Livelihood in a Changing World, Rome and Washington D.C: FAO and
World Bank, John Dixon and Aidan Gulliver with David Gibbon, 2001.
[100] A. Naghdi, S. Vahdat, H. Sajadzadeh, The role of social capital in attachment to place in traditional neighborhoods (case study, neighborhoods of Hamadan),
Urban Sociological Stud. 6 (18) (2016) 23–50.
[101] M.R. Blackburn (Ed.), The co – worker training mode, J. Intellectual Dev., Diability 26 (2013) 143–159.
[102] F. Adanır, Tradition and Rural Change in Southeastern Europe during Ottoman Rule, 2018.

13