Contextualizing recovery capital: qualitative experiences of recovery among people who use drugs in China

Recovery capital has become a prominent framework for understanding addiction recovery by shifting attention from pathology to the resources that enable long-term recovery. However, existing frameworks have largely been developed in Western contexts. This study examines how recovery capital can be contextualized within China’s community rehabilitation system. A qualitative study was conducted involving semi-structured interviews with 22 participants, including 15 people with histories of drug use and 7 frontline practitioners (anti-drug social workers, community workers and police officers). Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis informed by recovery capital theory. Five themes were developed. First, recovery was not reducible to abstinence but involved rebuilding meaningful social lives. Second, recovery depended not only on possessing resources but also on the ability to activate them under conditions of stigma and institutional constraint. Third, safety and trust emerged as a distinct domain of recovery capital, shaping whether relationships with families, professionals and governance institutions facilitated or hindered recovery. Fourth, successful social reintegration required relational repair and access to low-stigma spaces that allowed individuals to participate in everyday life without being defined by their drug use history. Finally, recovery capital was shaped by mismatched goals among individuals, service providers and governance agencies, producing tensions between personal recovery and institutional performance. This study proposes a contextualized Chinese recovery capital framework comprising ten interrelated domains. C-ARC is an ARC-based adaptation and extension that foregrounds resource activation, safety and trust, relational status, welfare access and the interaction between recovery and governance. It shows how recovery resources are shaped by institutional arrangements and highlights the need to contextualize recovery capital across different political and welfare settings.