Interprating Social Strata’s Approaches to the Prevalence of Covid-19 in Relation to Social Resilience
Subject Areas : Research on Iranian social issuesAli Hatami 1 , Hossein Nourinia 2 , Hasan Pournik 3
1 - Research Instructor, Department of Cultural Sociology, Institute for Culture, Art and Architecture, Institute for Humanities and Social Studies in ACECR Tehran, Iran.
2 - Research Instructor, Department of Cultural Sociology, Institute for Culture, Art and Architecture, Institute for Humanities and Social Studies in ACECR Tehran, Iran.
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of Technology and Society Studies, Institute for Cultural, Social, and Civilizational Studies, Tehran, Iran.
Keywords: COVID-19, Disaster, Agency, Social Strata, Social Resilience.,
Abstract :
Throughout history, humans have offered various interpretations of natural phenomena that impact social life, some of which have escalated into social issues. These interpretations aim to explain the causes and factors behind hazards, events, disasters, and crises. These factors can be broadly categorized into four groups: a) individual human factors, b) societal human factors, c) natural laws, and d) supernatural factors. The sociology of disaster identifies three theoretical approaches to hazards in society: first, hazards as acts of God and the result of divine will; second, as acts of nature and the result of natural laws; and third, as social processes and the outcome of intended or unintended individual, group, and institutional actions. Each approach examines hazards from a distinct perspective, explores their causes, and proposes different solutions for prevention. With the emergence of COVID-19 in Iran in February 2020, Iranian society adopted various approaches to this pandemic as a serious hazard, with all three approaches observable to varying degrees. This article seeks to examine and interpret the combination of existing approaches to the spread of COVID-19 in Iran during its prevalence. Using secondary analysis and data from the third wave of the Tehran residents’ attitudes survey toward COVID-19, the findings indicate that the public’s view of the pandemic is predominantly neither theological nor fatalistic. Most Tehran residents (63.3%) attributed the spread of COVID-19 to human and institutional factors, emphasizing the role of citizens’ behavior, organizations, institutions, and powerful countries. Approximately 23.7% viewed it as a result of natural factors, while only 13% considered it divine wrath. Notably, these approaches varied significantly across social strata. Women, more than men, tended to uphold traditional views, attributing a greater role to divine wrath. Significant differences in approaches to COVID-19 were also found based on other background variables such as age, marital status, employment status, education level, and residential area. The concept of social resilience is employed to explain societal continuity or disruption, demonstrating that Iranian society exhibits high resilience during crises, favoring continuity over collapse.
Keywords: COVID-19, Disaster, Agency, Social Strata, Social Resilience
Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in Iran in February 2020, was not only a health crisis but also a complex social phenomenon that elicited varied responses from different societal groups. This article, drawing on sociological perspectives, analyzes how various social strata interpreted this crisis and its relationship with social resilience. Disasters—whether natural like earthquakes, technological like Chernobyl, or social like wars—have had profound impacts on societies throughout modern history. Contrary to common assumptions, modernization has not prevented such events but has introduced new complexities and unforeseen dimensions. The sociology of disaster, as an interdisciplinary field, examines these phenomena through the lens of social structures, interactions, and responses, defining disasters as events causing human or material losses and disrupting core societal functions.
With the onset of COVID-19 in Iran, all three approaches were observed simultaneously: some viewed it as divine punishment, others as a natural phenomenon, and some as a result of poor management or social behaviors. This article aims to analyze these approaches, their interplay with social resilience, and how Iranian society avoided collapse and sustained social continuity during this crisis. Previous studies on disasters and societal responses, both in Iran and globally, provide the theoretical foundation for this research. In Persian literature, Hekmatpanah (2012) views natural disasters as divine signs for reflection and behavioral reform, emphasizing their spiritual significance. Fajri (2009) considers disasters as divine tests that can lead to spiritual growth, strengthened faith, or warnings to humanity. Mehrain and Kianpour (2017) expand these views, proposing four approaches—theological, natural, closed rationality, and institutional—to analyze disasters, reflecting the diversity of interpretations in Iranian society. In English literature, the sociology of disaster traces its roots to events like the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, covering a broad range of topics. Fritz (1961) highlights social solidarity post-disaster, showing how such events can strengthen social bonds. Bonanno et al. (2010) explore the psychological impacts of disasters, focusing on individual resilience. Aldrich and Meyer (2014) identify trust and social resilience as key factors in post-crisis community recovery, while Frailing and Harper (2016) note increased crime and social deviance following disasters. Despite this rich background, the sociology of disaster in Iran remains in its early stages. Given Iran’s geographic and social vulnerability to disasters, interdisciplinary research in this field is limited and requires further development. This article seeks to address this gap by focusing on the COVID-19 pandemic, linking sociological perspectives with empirical data. The theoretical foundation of this study rests on two main pillars: the stages of disaster response and interpretive approaches to disasters.
Stages of Disaster Response
- Confrontation: This stage involves initial reactions from individuals and institutions. Social inequalities significantly influence access to resources and support.
- Response: Responses vary based on individual (e.g., age, gender) and social (e.g., education) characteristics, ranging from selfishness to altruism.
- Recovery: This stage focuses on rebuilding daily life and social bonds, heavily reliant on social resilience.
- Mitigation: Involves preventive measures and planning to reduce future risks, requiring collaboration between institutions and society.
Approaches to Disaster
Three main approaches explain the causes of disasters:
- Divine Agency: Disasters are seen as part of God’s will, punishment, or test, potentially strengthening faith or prompting behavioral reform. This perspective is prominent in religious societies like Iran.
- Natural Agency: Disasters result from human interactions with nature or biological processes (e.g., viral transmission), emphasizing scientific and environmental factors.
- Human-Institutional Agency: Disasters are attributed to inefficient policies, structural inequalities, or inappropriate social behaviors, focusing on human responsibility.
Social resilience, defined as a society’s collective ability to cope with stress and return to normalcy, is a central concept in this study. Its strength depends on the dominant approach in society and the level of social cohesion. During the COVID-19 crisis, social resilience serves as a measure of how society responded to this disaster.
Methodology
This study employs secondary analysis, using data from the third wave of a survey conducted by Tehran Municipality in April 2020, during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey aimed to assess Tehran residents’ attitudes toward COVID-19 and government policies, with a diverse sample of individuals over 18 years old (average age: 41.7 years; 49.5% male, 50.5% female). The sample varied in education, marital status, and occupation, making it suitable for analyzing social perspectives. Data were collected via standardized questionnaires addressing concerns about infection, support for quarantine policies, and interpretations of COVID-19’s causes. Analyzing these data enabled the identification of thought patterns and group differences, contributing to a better understanding of social resilience in crisis conditions.
Findings
The findings reveal diverse perspectives and reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic among Tehran residents. Only 3.4% reported direct family experience with COVID-19, but 51.4% expressed high concern about infection, indicating the crisis’s widespread psychological impact. Additionally, 75% supported continued quarantine, but 33.7% faced limited resilience due to economic challenges, such as job loss or reduced income.
Approaches to COVID-19
- Divine Agency: 13% viewed COVID-19 as divine wrath or a test, emphasizing its spiritual significance.
- Natural Agency: 23.7% considered it a natural phenomenon resulting from biological processes.
- Human-Institutional Agency: 63.3% attributed it to human and institutional factors, including 27.7% citing government weaknesses, 18.8% public negligence, and 16.8% foreign conspiracies. This dominant approach reflects widespread criticism of social structures and behaviors.
Group Differences
- Gender: Women (16.2%) were more likely than men (9.9%) to believe in divine agency, possibly linked to their social and religious roles.
- Age: Young people under 30 (74.1%) emphasized human factors, while those over 64 (26.5%) leaned toward divine factors.
- Education: Those with less than a high school diploma (31.4%) were more likely to believe in divine agency than university graduates (5.7%), indicating education’s influence on interpretations.
- Marital and Employment Status: Singles and students were less likely to believe in divine fate, focusing more on institutional factors.
Based on these data, four social typologies were identified:
- Youth: Under 30, educated, and single, emphasizing human factors and critical of institutions.
- Elderly: Over 64, with a traditional tendency toward divine factors.
- Women: Often housewives and married, with a stronger inclination toward divine interpretations.
- Low-Educated: With lower education, exhibiting the highest belief in divine agency.
Theoretical Explanation: Social Resilience
Iranian society demonstrated significant resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Those believing in divine agency used faith and spirituality as coping mechanisms, fostering inner cohesion. Conversely, those with a human-institutional perspective engaged in civic actions, such as aiding victims or supporting healthcare workers, strengthening social bonds. Civic activities, including public donations and hospital support, reflected high social cohesion. However, trust in the government was low among those with a human-institutional perspective (55.1% lacked trust), yet this did not lead to social collapse. Instead of passivity, society moved toward continuity, rebuilding daily life through informal and civic networks. Trust and satisfaction indices were higher among divine-agency believers (51.2) than human-institutional believers (34.4), suggesting religious beliefs can serve as a resilience resource in crises.
Disscusion and Conclusion
This study revealed that Tehran residents adopted three main approaches to COVID-19: divine (13%), natural (23.7%), and human-institutional (63.3%). The human-institutional approach was dominant, varying by factors such as age, gender, education, and marital status. Social resilience, as the ability to rebuild bonds and sustain daily life, was evident in Iran, countering theories of social collapse and demonstrating societal cohesion and forward movement. These findings have implications for future policymaking, highlighting the importance of strengthening public trust, leveraging civic networks, and addressing group differences to better manage crises.
References
Aldrich, P. D., & Meyer, M. A. (2014) Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299
Bonanno, G. A., Brewin, C. R., Kaniasty, K., & La Greca, A. M. (2010) Weighing the costs of disaster: Consequences, risks, and resilience in individuals, families, and communities. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 11(1), 1–49.
Fajri, Mohammad Mehdi. (2009) Disasters and afflictions from an Islamic perspective. Mobaleghan Journal, 116, June-July, 53–62. (In Persian)
Frailing, K., & Harper, D. W. (2016) Toward a criminology of disaster. Springer.
Fritz, C. E. (1961) Disaster. In R. K. Merton & R. A. Nisbet (Eds.), Contemporary social problems (pp. 651–694). Harcourt, Brace and World.
Hekmatpanah, Manizheh. (2012) Investigating the causes of natural disasters and incidents from the perspective of the Quran and Hadith. National Conference on Earthquake Impact Analysis and Planning, East Azerbaijan, 21 August. (In Persian)
Mehrain, Mostafa; Kianpour, Sepideh. (2017) Different theoretical approaches to societal vulnerability to natural hazards. Science Promotion Quarterly, 12, Spring-Summer, 61–78. (In Persian)
Pournick, Hassan. (2021) Transformations of social relations and COVID-19: How the COVID-19 pandemic is transforming civil society relations. In COVID-19 and Iranian Society: Social Aspects, Vol. 2, edited by Mohammad Salgi et al., Tehran: Research Institute of Culture, Art, and Communications, 45–59. (In Persian)
Soleimani Gharehgol, Hadi et al. (2024) In defense of society: A critical analysis of the notion of social collapse in Iran. Iranian Social Issues Quarterly, 15(1), 41–78. (In Persian)
بک، اولریش (1397) جامعه مخاطره: به سوی مدرنیتهای نوین، ترجمه رضا فاضل و مهدی فرهمندنژاد، تهران، ثالث.
پورنیک، حسن (1400) «دگرگونیهای مناسبات اجتماعی و کرونا: چگونه همهگیری ویروس کووید 19 در حال دگرگونی مناسبات جامعه مدنی است»، در: کرونا و جامعه ایران: سویههای اجتماعی، جلد دوم، ویراسته محمد سلگی و دیگران، تهران، پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و هنر و ارتباطات، صص 45- 59.
حکمت¬پناه، منیژه (1391) «بررسی علل وقوع بلایا و حوادث طبیعی از دیدگاه قرآن و حدیث»، همایش ملی آسیب¬شناسی و برنامه¬ریزی اثرات زلزله، استان آذربایجان شرقی ، 21 مرداد.
دفتر طرح¬های ملی (1395) پیمایش ارزش¬ها و نگرش¬های ایرانیان، موج سوم، تهران، پژوهشگاه فرهنگ، هنر و ارتباطات.
سلیمانیقرهگل، هادی و دیگران (1403) «در دفاع از جامعه؛ واکاوی انتقادی انگارۀ فروپاشی اجتماعی در ایران»، فصلنامه مسائل اجتماعی ایران، سال پانزدهم، شماره 1، صص 41-78.
فجری، محمدمهدی (1388) «بلاها و مصائب از دیدگاه اسلام»، مجله مبلغان، شماره 116، خرداد و تیرماه، صص 53-62.
فرانکفورد، چاوا و دیوید نچمیاس (1390) روش¬های پژوهش در علوم اجتماعی، ترجمه فاضل لاریجانی و رضا فاضلی، تهران، سروش.
مهرآیین، مصطفی و سپیده کیان¬پور (1396) «رویکردهای نظری متفاوت به آسیبپذیری جامعه در برابر خطرات طبیعی»، فصلنامه ترویج علم، شماره 12، بهار و تابستان، صص 61-78.
هیفی، برایان (1396) مدرنیته متأخر و تغییر اجتماعی (بازسازی زندگی اجتماعی و فردی)، ترجمه یعقوب احمدی و پرویز سبحانی، تهران، کویر.
Aguirre, B.E. and Lane, D. (2019) "Fraud in Disaster: Rethinking the Phases", International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 39, 101232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101232.
Aldrich, P. D. and Meyer, M. A. (2014) "Social Capital and Community Resilience", American Behavioral Scientist, Pp:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299.
Ali, M. M. (2020) Religious and spiritual responses to COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Religion & Health, 59(3), 1419-1430.
Barsky, L. E., Trainor, J. E., Torres, M. R., & Aguirre, B. E. (2007) Managing volunteers: FEMA’s Urban Search and Rescue programme and interactions with unaffiliated responders in disaster response. Disasters, 31(4), 495–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2007.01017.x.
Beck, U; Giddens, A. and Lash, S. (1994) Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order. London: Polity Press.
Bonanno, G. A., Brewin, C. R., Kaniasty, K., and Greca, A. M. L. (2010). "Weighing the costs of disaster: Consequences, risks, and resilience in individuals, families, and communities", Psychological science in the public interest, 11(1), Pp: 1-49.
Collins, R. (2004) "Rituals of solidarity and security in the wake of terrorist attack". Sociological theory, 22(1), Pp: 53-87.
Drabik, T. E., & Drabik, R. A. (2019) The Sociology of Disaster: Fictional Explorations of Human Experiences. Routledge.
Farmer, P. (2001). Infections and inequalities: The modern plagues. University of California Press.
Frailing, K., & Harper, D. W. (2016) Toward a Criminology of Disaster. Springer. Fritz, C.E. (1961) Disaster. In: Merton, R.K. and Nisbet, R.A., Eds., Contemporary Social Problems, Harcourt, Brace and World, New York, 651-694.
Giddens, A. (1984) The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.
Johnstone, R. L. (2007) Religion in society: A sociology of religion. Pearson Education.
Killian, L. M (2002) An introduction to methodological problems of field studies in disasters, in: R. A. Stallings Bloomington (Ed.), Methods of Disaster Research, Xlibris.
Klein, J. L. (2000) The role of God in modern philosophy and theology. Religious Studies, 36(2), 243–259.
Perry, R. W. (2018) "Defining disaster: An evolving concept". In Handbook of disaster research (pp. 3-22). Springer, Cham.
Wallace, R. (2016) Big farms make big flu: Dispatches on infectious disease, agribusiness, and the nature of science. Monthly Review Press.
Webb, G. R. (2002) "Sociology, disasters, and terrorism: Understanding threats of the new millennium". Sociological focus, 35(1), Pp: 87-95.
