本研究以災難社會學中核心概念韌性為出發點，關注社會資本在災後重建中與韌性的關係，沿用了三種社會資本的分析架構，分別是牽絆式（bonding）、橫跨式（bridging）、縱連式（linking）三個面向，認為社會資本作為準公共財，在災後重建中起着正面的推動作用；同時，社會資本也有負外部性的影響，指團體的緊密聯繫雖有助於自身重建，但卻可能損害其他團體的利益，反而影響了整體重建進。
本文以台灣921震後集合住宅重建為個例，利用1999至2013年的村里數據、921地震相關文獻中的住宅數據和研究者自聯合新聞資料庫中搜尋和編碼的數據合併成面版數據，透過迴歸模型探討社會資本在集合住宅在重建過程中作為韌性的分析變項。研究結果顯示，各受災社區大樓的組織活動，如組織更新會和受災聯盟的新聞數越多，越有效提高重建成功的機會；而政治人物勘查受災社區大樓的新聞數越多，亦有效地提高重建成功的機會，但只有縣市長、立委層級的政治人物勘查能有明顯作用。此外，本文發現與既有921震後住宅研究與討論符合，在921震後集合住宅重建個案中，九二一基金會的補助作為外力介入因素，是集合住宅重建的重要成因，不過，在即使在忽略了基金會的外力介入條件下，社會資本作為災民間信任和互動的準公共財作用依然為重建成功發揮顯着幫助。

Resilience is an important concept in the Sociology of Disaster, and plays a key role in post-disaster recovery. Recent trends in Sociology of Disaster have led to a proliferation of studies that consider social capital as observations of resilience. Little is known about the impact of social capital on post-disaster recovery. Housing reconstruction is a major area of interest within the field post-earthquake recovery. The aim of this essay is to explore the relationship between social capital and housing reconstruction in post-921 earthquake recovery. Social capital, seen as a form of capital that produces public goods for a common, is associated with increased positive effect of recovery. However, group solidarity in communities is often purchased at the price of hostility toward out-group members. It is very important when measuring social capital to consider both of positive and negative externalities. This study uses the analysis frame recognized by existing researches that social capital can be classified into three types: bonding, bridging and linking. It also argues the three types would affect the housing reconstruction.

To outline these impacts in greater details, this paper is a case study of 921 earthquake housing reconstruction. Data for the study were collected from UDN (United Daily News) Data, the database of 921 earthquake recovery in Taiwan and the publications of 921 Earthquake Relief Foundation. Statistical results show a positive correlation between the predictive value of reconstruction completed and social capital. Organized social activity and political visitation have a positive effect on housing reconstruction. In sum, this finding broadly supports the work of other studies in this area related to social capital with resilience. Although extensive research concentrated on the advantageous influence of 921 reconstruction allowance. This research has also shown that social capital can play an important role in addressing the issue of post-disaster recovery.

六、參考文獻

九二一震災重建基金會，2009，《築巢專案—協助受災集合式住宅（社區）更新重建方案》。http://www.taiwan921.lib.ntu.edu.tw/921pdf/FH8907.pdf。取用日期：2018年01月09日
內政部營建署，《九二一震災住宅重建進度總結報告》。台北：內政部營建署。
吳杰穎、曾志雄，2006，〈影響 921 震災災後集合住宅都市更新重建之幾個因素探討〉。《建築與規劃學報》7(2): 135-153。
李宗義、林宗弘、謝志誠，2011，〈重建信任網絡：九二一地震後集合住宅的重建成敗〉。論文發表於「台灣社會學2011年度學術研討會」，台北：國立台灣大學、台灣社會學會，2011年12月10日至11日。
林昭遠、劉昌文，2005，《九二一震災災後重建實錄》。台北, 五南.
林冠慧、林宗弘、胡伯維、張宜君、葉錦勳、詹忠翰、劉季宇，2017，〈地震, 屋毀與傷亡: 集集地震風險的因果分析〉。《都市與計劃》44(1), 83-112。
陳志柔，2017，〈有效治理的桎梏: 當代中國集體抗爭與國家反應
〉。《台灣社會學》33:113-164。
張宜君、林宗弘,，2012，〈不平等的災難: 921 地震下的受災風險與社會階層化〉。《人文及社會科學集刊》 24(2): 193-231。
張蒼松，2009，《種一棵家族樹》。台北：台大出版中心。
張劭農、黃雅盈、丁致成，2010，《家園重生：100個災後重建的故事1994-2008》。台北：內政部營建署。
葉高華，2013，〈社會脆弱性可解釋九二一地震死亡率分布嗎?〉。《思與言: 人文與社會科學雜誌》51(1): 135-153。
謝志誠，2010，〈集合住宅自力更新重建之民間經驗〉。《社區發展季刊》131： 211-229。
賴美蓉，2002，〈居民對 921 災後社區住宅重建之意願調查分析〉。《都市與計》29(4): 533-550。

Aldrich, D. P., 2012, Building resilience: Social capital in post-disaster recovery. University of Chicago Press.
Aldrich, D. P. and M. A. Meyer, 2015, "Social capital and community resilience." American Behavioral Scientist 59(2): 254-269.
Aldrich, D. P. and K. Crook, 2008, "Strong civil society as a double-edged sword: Siting trailers in post-Katrina New Orleans." Political Research Quarterly 61(3): 379-389.
Coleman, J. S., 1988, "Social capital in the creation of human capital." American Journal of Sociology 94: S95-S120.
Cutter, S. L., 1996, "Societal responses to environmental hazards." International Social Science Journal 48(150): 525-536.
Granovetter, M. S., 1973, "The strength of weak ties." American Journal of Sociology 78(6): 1360-1380.
Lin, N., 1999, "Social networks and status attainment." Annual Review of Sociology 25(1): 467-487.
Lin, N., 2008, "A network theory of social capital." The handbook of social capital 50(1): 69.
Lin, K. H. E., Lee, H. C., & Lin, T. H. ,2017, " How does resilience matter? An empirical verification of the relationships between resilience and vulnerability". Natural Hazards, 1-22.
Putnam, R. D., et al., 1994, Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy, Princeton university press.
Putnam, R. D., 1995, "Bowling alone: America's declining social capital." Journal of democracy 6(1): 65-78.
Satyanath, S., et al., 2013, Bowling for fascism: social capital and the rise of the Nazi Party, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Szreter, S. and M. Woolcock, 2004, "Health by association? Social capital, social theory, and the political economy of public health." International journal of epidemiology 33(4): 650-667.
Shirley, W. Lynn, Bryan J. Boruff, and Susan L. Cutter. "Social vulnerability to environmental hazards." Hazards Vulnerability and Environmental Justice. Routledge, 2012. 143-160.
Tse, C. W., Wei, J., & Wang, Y., 2013, Social capital and disaster recovery: Evidence from Sichuan earthquake in 2008. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development.
Wu, J. Y. and M. K. Lindell, 2004, "Housing reconstruction after two major earthquakes: The 1994 Northridge earthquake in the United States and the 1999 Chi‐Chi earthquake in Taiwan." Disasters 28(1): 63-81.