IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- The Preparedness Level of School
The Mediating Effect of Community Leadership on Community in Handling the Earthquake
and Tsunami Threats in Banda Aceh City
Community Resilience Elements and Community N Nandi and T Havwina

- Mapping Perception of Community

Preparedness Preparedness towards Flood in Muar
River, Johor Malaysia
T A Tengku Asmara and A N Muhamad
To cite this article: A A Ridzuan et al 2020 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 479 012009 Ludin

- Analyzing the impact of community-based

approaches on disaster preparedness to
the risk of tropical cyclone induced
flooding in Chimanimani District,
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Zimbabwe
W Rangarirai, C Marnani and A Rahmat

This content was downloaded from IP address 104.28.68.78 on 20/06/2023 at 11:15

The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

The Mediating Effect of Community Leadership on

Community Resilience Elements and Community
Preparedness

A A Ridzuan*1, M J Kadir1, S Yaacob1, N A M Zainol1, HAbdullah1, N H Roslan1, M M R

Wong2 and N D F Ahmad2
1
Faculty of Management and Defence Studies, National Defence University of Malaysia, Kem
Perdana Sungai Besi, 57000 Kuala Lumpur
2
Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) Research Centre, National Defence
University of Malaysia, Kem Perdana Sungai Besi, 57000 Kuala Lumpur

*Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. Disasters can occur in various forms with durations ranging from mere hours to days,
weeks, or even months of prolonged damages and losses. Approaches taken to face such situation
can build resiliency in a community. Lacking it, important community decisions will be made
under the constraints of the crisis or disaster. A community with good disaster preparedness and
local leadership engagement will be more capable of responding to, and managing disaster risks,
which in turn will reduce damages and losses caused by disasters. This study was conducted to
gauge the extent at which community leadership mediates the relationship between community
resilience elements (community engagement, community education, and community awareness)
and community preparedness. This was done using the results from questionnaires gathered from
318 respondents at Bukit Antarabangsa, Selangor, Malaysia. A structural equation modelling
was employed to assess the validity and reliability of the instrument and thus test the research
hypotheses. Based on the path model analysis, there are significant correlations to prove that
community leadership is a viable partial mediator between community engagement, education
and awareness, towards enhancing community preparedness. This also means that the presence
of a capable community leader may well be a critical success factor to ensure that the respective
community is better prepared and more resilient against disasters.

1. Introduction
Disasters are often a result of the interaction between hazards and varying dimensions of vulnerabilities,
such as physical, social, health, and economical, among others. A common setup in any disaster is the
exposure of a significant number of vulnerable population to a hazard, resulting in severe damage and/or
disruption of their livelihood activities in such a way that recovery is unlikely without external aid [1].
Based on the World Bank estimates, the world's costliest disasters include the 2011 earthquake and
tsunami in Japan (US$235 billion); 1995 Great Hanshin earthquake (US$100 billion); Hurricane Katrina
in 2005, and the Chile earthquake in 2010 (US$81 billion); and 2011 flood in Thailand (US$46.5 billion)
[2]. While Malaysia has relatively lower risk for disasters caused by climate hazards compared to its
neighbouring countries, there were several cases of landslide disaster in the country’s history. One such
instance is the collapse of the Highland Towers at Hill View Garden on 11 December 1993 due to
continuous heavy rain that went on for ten days, leading to a major landslide that resulted in 48 deaths
[3]. Other major landslides include the one that occurred on 15 May 1999 at the vicinity of Athenaeum
Tower, Bukit Antarabangsa, the landslide on 1 November 2002 at Hill View Garden which killed a
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

family of eight, and the landslide of 6 December 2008 at Kampung Pasir, Hulu Kelang which destroyed
49 houses [4].
Community resilience describes the collective ability of a neighbourhood or geographically defined
area to deal with stressors and efficiently resume the rhythms of daily life through cooperation following
shocks [5]. Disaster research has long recognized that communities need to work together regularly to
survive and recover from catastrophic impacts [6]. However, there is insufficient clarity for a precise
resilience-building process [7]. Approaches that can be correlated with achieving resilience for
communities include reducing pre-disaster vulnerabilities and conducting pre-event prevention activities
to minimize the negative consequences of disaster. While these have been identified, the domains
involved are rather broad and lack the specificity required for implementation [8].
One of the dimensions that can be associated with building disaster resilience is leadership.
Leadership has been defined as the ability to guide and motivate individuals, groups or communities to
achieve a specified goal, by guiding them and providing focus and inspiration. It is not a quality reserved
only for those at the top of a hierarchy, but can be practiced by anyone with the right skills. For a
community, leadership is usually used in reference to a key person for the community’s structure,
networking and collaboration. Scholars have identified that in a community, the leader’s role is to guide,
direct, lead and serve its members in order to make them feel safe, comfortable and protected throughout
any issue they may face [9]. A leader can make use of self-organising processes to promote community
interests and support groups not only to address emergency stresses but also to improve their capacities
[10], [11]. In managing disaster and emergency preparedness, community leadership is a mutual
relationship between the leader and his/her followers. A community that is going through a disastrous
event will typically be in a state of confusion and uncertainty, lacking direction and control, as well as
agonized with losses of life and property. Such conditions demand a community leader to step into
action, and take charge of the daunting tasks ahead. Immediately post-disaster, a community leader is
required to set the direction in the midst of confusion, encourage rescue and rebuilding efforts, be a
comforter, besides being a source of support, hope and purpose [12]. Additionally, another dimension
contributing towards building resilience is disaster preparedness, which is the state of readiness of an
organisation or community to respond to a disastrous event, while also reducing the negative aftermaths
[13]. Preparedness involves actions to ensure that, when an emergency occurs, the communities,
resources and services are available and capable of taking appropriate actions for response and recovery.
Community preparedness in particular is the ability of communities to prepare for, withstand, and
recover in both the short and long terms from public health incidents. Community preparedness will
improve the ability of individuals and groups to reduce the effects of the hazard impact and manage
their resources until assistance is available. Being prepared for, and being aware of the risks of hazardous
events and taking steps to reduce them can eventually reduce their negative effects and/or resulting
damage.
Considering the above-mentioned dimensions, it should be noted that theoretical and empirical
literature examining community resilience elements, community leadership and community
preparedness are undoubtedly scarce, so our understanding of this distinction is limited. Hence, the
objective of this study is to gauge the extent at which community leadership mediates the relationships
between community engagement, education, and awareness with community preparedness.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Community Resilience Elements, Community Leadership and Community Preparedness

Based on past studies available on community resilience elements, education, leadership, self-reliance,
resource availability and engagement are all associated with community preparedness against disasters
[14]. A study on communities affected by Typhoon Katrina found that the community members
conducted activities focusing on establishing social networking, engagement, and understanding local
leaders’ instructions, which helped in building the community’s disaster resilience [15]. Another study
on households in Kuching, Sarawak who are living in flood-prone areas found indications that critical
awareness, attitude, subjective norm, risk perception, appropriate disaster education, trust in agencies
and intention to prepare for flood disaster affect flood disaster preparedness within the community

2
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

members [16]. For another community at Bukit Antarabangsa, Selangor, proper awareness, experience,
exposure, reaction, attitude, awareness, education, engagement and leadership were all found to
contribute towards increasing their preparedness in facing future disasters [17], [18], [19]. One of the
most common findings from these past studies is the importance of community education towards
building their knowledge and thus disaster preparedness and resilience. An educated community is more
ready to respond properly to disaster events, subsequently suffering lesser damage and casualties [20].
A study on ENLA (Emergency Network of Los Angeles) and LACDPH (Los Angeles County
Department of Public Health) found that communities with sufficient knowledge about disasters are
more capable to coordinate resources to increase resilience and will support each other during a disaster
[7]. Similarly, community knowledge was identified as the main factor towards increasing community
preparedness against earthquake disasters in Tehran [21].
Resilience Theory suggested that community involvement is vital in any activities related to disaster
preparedness [22]. The same theory also suggested that every community program needs to be planned
with the aim to enhance community knowledge in order to reduce environmental risks in their locality,
and to complement community-based disaster risk management processes undertaken by the particular
community [23]. Another relevant theory for this study is the Cultural Theory, which claimed that
humans perceive and act towards the world around them based on their social aspects and cultural
adherence [24], [25]. These two theories, combined with the Trait Theory which revolves around
individual personalities and characteristics, led to the development of leadership theories which explain
the approaches to be taken by a community leader in engaging his/her community members [26]. The
traits identified in the Great Man Theory are applied today to describe leadership skills such as
confidence, judgement skills, and adaptability among others. These skills are indeed considered as pre-
requisite skills for community leaders in exercising their role as a leader. In correlation to the theories
mentioned above in this paragraph, the application of resilience and leadership theories in previous
studies served as evidence that community resilience elements and community leadership if properly
implemented will lead to an enhancement in community preparedness.

2.2 Conceptual Framework and Research Hypothesis

Findings from literature studies as per section 2.1 were used as the basis to develop a conceptual
framework for this study, as shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1. Community leadership mediate the relationship between community resilience elements
(community engagement, community education and community awareness), and community
preparedness.

Based on the framework, it can be hypothesized that:

Hypothesis 1: Community leadership mediates the relationship between community engagement and
community preparedness.
Hypothesis 2: Community leadership mediates the relationship between community education and
community preparedness.
Hypothesis 3: Community leadership mediates the relationship between community awareness and
community preparedness.

3. Methodology

3
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

A cross-sectional research design was employed because it allowed the researchers to combine
community resilience literature, and the survey as the main process of collecting data to achieve the
research objective. This research design is also appropriate to enhance data accuracy, reduce bias and
ensure high data quality [27], [28]. This study involved local community at Zone 1 – 4 (Hulu Kelang),
Zone 5 – 9 (Bukit Antarabangsa), Zone 10 – 15 (Lembah Jaya), Zone 16 – 19 (Cempaka), and Zone 20
– 25 (Teratai) of Bukit Antarabangsa in Ampang Jaya Municipality, Selangor, Malaysia. At the initial
stage of data collection, a survey questionnaire was drafted based on the community resilience literature
followed by a pilot study to verify the questionnaire’s content and format. Due to familiarity of the target
respondents with the national language (Malay), a back-translation technique was employed to translate
the content of the drafted questionnaire from English into Malay in order to enhance the validity and
reliability of research findings. Information gathered from the pilot test was then utilized to develop the
content and format of the survey questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of four major sections
developed from many validated scales such as “Getting to Resilience a Coastal Community Resilience
Evaluation Tool” by New Jersey Office of Coastal Management, “National Strategy for Disaster
Resilience”, and the “Communities Advancing Resilience Toolkit (CART)” by Pfefferbaum,
Pfefferbaum, and Van Horn [29], [30], [31]. In total there were five items of community engagement,
three for community education, four items on community awareness, another four for community
leadership, and six items for community preparedness. All items used in the questionnaires were
measured using a 7-item scale ranging from “strongly never/strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly
always/strongly agree” (7). Demographic variables were used as the control variables since the study
focused on community resilience and community leadership towards community preparedness.
The researchers obtained an official approval and received advice from the Deputy Director for
Development, Ampang Jaya Municipal Office, to conduct the survey. The targeted population for this
study was the local community at Bukit Antarabangsa. As the list of local community members was not
available, a convenient sampling technique was used to distribute the survey questionnaires.
Considering path modelling will be used for analysis, a total of 350 questionnaires were distributed over
the 200 suggested in literature sources, to compensate for missing cases or unusable questionnaires [32].
As a result, 318 usable questionnaires were returned to the researchers, yielding a 91% response rate.
The survey questionnaires were answered by participants based on their consents and voluntary basis.
Subsequently, SmartPLS version 3.2.8 was employed to analyze the survey questionnaires and test the
research hypotheses. Data analysis followed a step-by-step procedure: First, a validity test was
performed to evaluate both convergent and discriminant validity. Second, a reliability analysis was
performed using Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability. Third, the structural model was assessed
by examining the path coefficients using standardised betas (β), t and p statistics. In addition, R2 was
used as an indicator of the overall predictive strength of the model. The values of R2 were considered
as follows: 0.19 (weak), 0.33 (moderate) and 0.67 (substantial) [33], [34]. In order to predict the role of
the mediator, the mediation analysis procedure in PLS-SEM was also performed [37]. The procedure
categorized three types of mediation, namely: (1) complementary mediation (partial mediation): the
indirect effect and the direct effect both are significant and point in the same direction; (2) competitive
mediation (partial mediation): the indirect effect and the direct effect both are significant and point in
opposite direction; and (3) indirect only mediation (full mediation): the indirect effect is significant but
not the direct effect; and two types of non-mediation; (1) direct only non-mediation: the direct effect is
significant but not the indirect effect; and (2) no effect non-mediation: neither the direct nor the indirect
effect are significant.

4. Results & Discussion

The sample profile for this study (N=318) is as follows: respondents are mostly female (56.1%), Malay
ethnicity (94.5%), largest age group being 31 to 40 years old (38.5%), those with married status made
up 72.3% of respondents, majority has lived in the area for over 10 years (58.8%), majority of
respondents lived in Zone Area 5 to Zone Area 9 (45.3%), salary earned between RM1,001-3,000
(62.2%), ordinary member of community social responsibility (89.2%), and involved in community
disaster preparedness activities - never (60.1%).

4
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

The outcomes of confirmatory factor analysis were shown in Table 1 and Figure 2. Table 1 shows
that community resilience elements (community engagement, community education, and community
awareness), leadership in the community, and community preparedness had the values of average
variance extracted (AVE) higher than 0.5, indicating that they met the acceptable standard of convergent
validity [34], [35], [36]. The table also shows that all constructs which had the diagonal values of √ AVE
were greater than the squared correlation with other constructs in off-diagonal, showing that all
constructs met the acceptable standard of discriminant validity [34], [37].

Figure 2. Result from the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) Test.

Table 1. Results of Convergent and Discriminant Validity Analyses.

Preparednes
AVE Awareness Education Engagement Leadership
s
Awareness 0.736 0.858
Education 0.747 0.418 0.864
Engagement 0.655 0.606 0.442 0.809
Leadership 0.631 0.508 0.396 0.468 0.794
Preparedness 0.690 0.802 0.491 0.648 0.522 0.831
Note: √ AVE shows in diagonal

Meanwhile, Table 2 below shows that all constructs loaded more strongly on their own constructs in
the model, exceeding the specified minimum (0.7), and proving that the validity of measurement model
met the criteria [33], [36], [38]. The composite reliability and Cronbach’s Alpha also had values greater
than 0.8, indicating that the instrument used in this study maintained high internal consistency [34], [39].

5
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

Table 2. The Results of Factor Loadings for Different Constructs and Construct Reliability Analysis.

Number of Composite Cronbach

Construct Factor Loading
Item Reliability Alpha
Awareness 4 0.831 – 0.891 0.918 0.880
Education 3 0.764 – 0.912 0.898 0.836
Engagement 5 0.773 – 0.904 0.904 0.868
Leadership 4 0.761 – 0.816 0.872 0.805
Preparedness 6 0.774 – 0.852 0.930 0.910

Subsequently, Figure 3 and Table 3 shows the outcomes of SmartPLS path model testing using
bootstrapping procedure. The value of R2 is used as an indicator of the overall predictive strength of the
model, and can be interpreted as follows: 0.19 = weak; 0.33 = moderate; and 0.67 = substantial [33],
[37], [40]. Through the test, the inclusion of community engagement, community education and
community awareness in the analysis had a value of R2 0.323 which explained 32.3 percent of the
variance in community leadership. The inclusion of community engagement, community education,
awareness community, and community leadership in the analysis yielded R2 value of 0.703 which
explained 70.3 percent of the variance in community preparedness. This indicates that community
leadership plays a mediation role in the hypothesized model. The results of SmartPLS path model
analysis revealed three important findings with respect to the hypotheses outlined in section 2.2. For all
H1, H2 and H3, community leadership acted as a complementary mediator (partial mediation) with
significant correlation in the relationship between community engagement, community education, and
community awareness with community preparedness, respectively. Statistically, this also confirms that
community leadership does act as an important mediating variable between community resilience
elements (community engagement, community education, and community awareness) and community
preparedness. Further understanding on the mediating effect of community leadership as a
complementary mediator between the IVs and DVs was also achieved through the mediation analysis
procedure [37].

Figure 3. Outcome of Hypotheses Testing.

6
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

Hence, in the context of this study at Bukit Antarabangsa, a community equipped with proper
engagement, education and awareness, as well as led by a leader with the necessary leadership skills
will go on to possess better disaster preparedness. According to majority of the respondents, the level of
community education, community engagement, community leadership, and community preparedness
are moderate. This situation also posits that majority of respondents feel that the high levels of
community resilience among those living in challenging and dangerous environments have increases
the capacity and capability of local community towards enhancing their preparedness.

Table 3. Outcomes of SmartPLS Path Model Testing.

Relationships β T Statistics P Values R2

Engagement -> Preparedness 0.198*** 5.278 0.000
Education -> Preparedness 0.125*** 4.156 0.000
0.703
Awareness -> Preparedness 0.588*** 15.964 0.000
Leadership -> Preparedness 0.081* 2.249 0.000
Engagement -> Leadership 0.201* 2.420 0.016
Education -> Leadership 0.177** 3.255 0.001 0.323
Awareness -> Leadership 0.313*** 4.972 0.000
Note. Significant at *t ≥ 1.96; **t ≥ 2.57; ***t ≥ 3.29

Furthermore, this study offers three important implications. In terms of theoretical contribution, the
results of this study confirmed that community leadership and community resilience elements
(community engagement, community education, and community awareness) have been important
determinants of community preparedness in the studied community areas. This result is consistent with,
and has broadened the concept explored by past studies [7], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21].
In terms of robustness of the research methodology, the survey questionnaire used in this study has
satisfactorily met the validity and reliability criteria. This may lead to produced accurate and reliable
research findings. As for the practical contribution, the findings of this study may be used as useful
guidelines by local communities in improving their capability and resilience to cope with unpredictable
disasters in the future. In addition to this, public programs, policies, societal norms, values, and other
community institutions shape the style and degree to which community are able to fulfil their functions,
as well as their ability to acquire and develop new capabilities when challenged. Most of the community
members also thought that a disaster education program needs to be provided to the respective
community in order to increase their awareness and readiness for disaster response.

5. Conclusion
This study confirms that a community leader may function as a guide for his/her local community
towards enhancing their awareness and readiness. It can also be concluded that present and future
undertakings on community-based disaster management need to emphasize on community education,
community engagement, community awareness, as well as community leadership as critical success
factors. A capable community leader with good personal coping capacity during disasters will strongly
induce positive subsequent attitudinal and behavioral outcomes (e.g., readiness, compliance with law,
cooperation, commitment and ethics) among the community members. These positive consequences
may then result in enhanced and sustained community resilience against various disasters. For future
research, the community resilience factors as used in this study can be expanded further to include more
variables to enhance the contribution of the study towards the field.

7
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

6. References
[1] Rabiul I, Roslina K, Siti Aznor A, Soon JJ and Abdul Rahim A 2016 A Review on Mechanism
of Flood Disaster Management in Asia International Review of Management and Marketing
6(1) 29–52
[2] Parks T, Maramis L, Sunchindah A and Wongwatanakul W 2018 ASEAN as The Architect for
Regional Development Cooperation Advancing ASEAN: Centrality & Catalyzing Action for
Sustainable Development (San Francisco, CA: The ASIA Foundation)
[3] Bernama 2008 History of landslides in Hulu Klang Accessed from
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=376789
[4] Abd Rasid J 2006 A framework of a national slope safety system for Malaysia (Thesis)
(Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR: University of Hong Kong)
[5] Aldrich DP 2012 Building resilience: Social Capital in Post-disaster Recovery (Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press)
[6] Fischer HW 2008 Response to Disaster: Fact Versus Fiction and its Perpetuation (3rd ed.)
(Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America)
[7] Chandra A, Williams M and Tang J 2013 Getting actionable about community resilience: the
Los Angeles county community disaster resilience project American Journal of Public
Health 103(7) 1181–89
[8] Chandra A, Acosta J, Stern S, Uscher-Pines L, Williams MV, Yeung D, Garnett J and Meredith
LS 2011 Building Community Resilience to Disasters: A Way Forward to Enhance National
Health Security (Santa Monica, CA; Arlington, VA; Pittsburgh, PA: RAND Corporation)
[9] Popper M and Mayseless O 2003 Back to basics: applying a parenting perspective to
transformational leadership The Leadership Quarterly 14(1) 41–65
[10] Chaskin RJ, Brown P, Venkatesh S and Vidal A 2001 Building Community Capacity (New York:
Walter de Gruyter)
[11] Hahn T, Olsson P, Folke C and Johansson K 2007 Trust-building, knowledge generation and
organizational innovations: the role of a bridging organization for adaptive management of a
wetland landscape around Kristianstad, Sweden Human Ecology 34 573–92
[12] Boin A, Sanneke K and Werner O 2013 Leadership in times of crisis: a framework for
assessment Intl. Rev. Pub. Administration 18 79–91
[13] Conlon L and Wiechula R 2011 Preparing nurses for future disasters the Sichuan experience
Australasian Emergency Nursing J. 14(4) 246–250
[14] Jang LJ 2009 Disaster resilience: constructing a disaster resistant community Fu Hsing Kang
Academic J. (復興崗學報) 96 29–52
[15] Nelson SA 2015 Myths of Katrina: field notes from a geoscientist The Minnesota Review, 2015
84 60–68
[16] Fakhru’l-Razi A, Aini MS and Ahmad Azan R 2018 Preparedness to flood disaster amongst
households in Eastern Malaysia Proceeding 13th International Conference on Law,
Education, Business and Disaster Management (LEBDM-18), Budapest, Hungary
[17] Ahmad Azan R, Mohd Juraimy K, Zamri I, Ungku Azly UZ and Mazura MZ 2015 Kajian
ketahanan komuniti terhadap kesedaran komuniti dalam persediaan menghadapi bencana
Prosiding Seminar Bencana Alam 2015, Universiti Malaysia Sabah
[18] Ahmad Azan R, Mohd Juraimy K, Safar Y, Rina Suryani O, Noor Azmi MZ and Mazura MZ
2016 Community resilience elements and community preparedness at Bukit Antarabangsa
Proceeding of International Symposium on Earth Hazard and Disaster Mitigation (ISEDM
2016). Institute Technology Bandung, ITB Campus, Bandung-Indonesia
[19] Ahmad Azan R, Mohd Juraimy K, Safar Y, Rina Suryani O, Noor Azmi MZ and Mazura MZ
2017 Community Resilience Elements and Community Preparedness at Bukit Antarabangsa.
American Institute of Physics (AIP) Conf. Proc. 1857 110003
[20] United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) 2006 Hyogo
Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to

8
The 7th AUN/SEED-Net Regional Conference on Natural Disaster (RCND 2019) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 479 (2020) 012009 doi:10.1088/1755-1315/479/1/012009

Disaster Accessed from https://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L

docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf
[21] Mahalati H and Kaveh Z 2004 Measuring people attitudes about earthquake in Tehran: focusing
on training and ways of information distribution The Second International Congress of
Disaster Management and Health Proceedings (Tehran: Shokravi Publication)
[22] Braverman MT, Meyers JM and Bloomberg L 1994 How youth programs can promote resilience
California Agriculture 48(7) 30–5
[23] Masten AS 2001 Ordinary magic: resilience processes in development American Psychologist
56(3) 227–38
[24] Douglas M 1978 Cultural Bias (London: Royal Anthropological Institute)
[25] Thompson M, Ellis R and Wildavsky A 1990 Political Cultures. Cultural Theory (Boulder:
Westview Press)
[26] Derue S, Nahrgang J, Wellman N and Humphrey S 2011 Trait and behavior theories of leadership:
an integration and meta-analytic test of their relative validity Personnel Psych. 64(1) 7–52
[27] Creswell JW 2012 Educational Research: Planning, Conduct, and Evaluating Quantitative and
Qualitative Research (4th ed.) (Boston, MA: Pearson Education)
[28] Sekaran U and Bougie R 2013 Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach (6th
Ed). (United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)
[29] New Jersey Office of Coastal Management 2011 Getting to Resilience: A Coastal Community
Resilience Evaluation Tool (New Jersey: Department of Environmental Protection)
[30] Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience 2013 Australian Disaster Resilience Handbook 6.
National Strategy for Disaster Resilience: Community Engagement Framework (East
Melbourne: Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience)
[31] Pfefferbaum RL, Pfefferbaum B and Van Horn RL 2011 Communities Advancing Resilience
Toolkit (CART): The CART Integrated System (Oklahoma City, OK: Terrorism and Disaster
Center,University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center)
[32] Wong KKK 2013 Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using
SmartPLS Marketing Bulletin 24(1) 1–32
[33] Chin WW 1998 The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling Modern
Methods for Business Research ed. GA Marcoulides (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates) pp 295–358
[34] Henseler J, Ringle CH and Sinkovics RR 2009 The use of partial least squares path modeling in
international marketing new challenges to international marketing Advances in International
Marketing 20 277–319
[35] Barclay D, Higgins C and Thompson R 1995 The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal
modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration Tec. Stud. 2(2) 285–309
[36] Fornell C and Larker DF 1981 Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error: algebra and statistics J. Marketing Res. 18(3) 328–388
[37] Hair Jr. JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM and Sarstedt M 2017 A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications)
[38] Gefen D and Straub D 2005 A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: tutorial and
annotated example Communication of the Correlation for Information Systems 16 91–109
[39] Nunally JC and Bernstein IH 1994 Psychometric Theory (New York: McGraw-Hill)
[40] Wetzels M, Odekerken-Schroder G and van Oppen C 2009 Using PLS path modeling for
assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration MIS Quarterly
33(1) 177–195

7. Acknowledgement
This research works was funded by research grant, FRGS/1/2018/SS03/UPNM/02/2, National Defence
University of Malaysia and Ministry of Education.