Flood, disaster resilience and social cohesion informing sustainable disaster recovery policy in Malaysia

• Main Authors: Mohamed Ludin, Salizar, Firdaus, Mohd Khairul Zul Hasymi, Yusoff, D, Arbon, Paul
• Format: Conference or Workshop Item
• Language: English; English
• Published: 2016
• Subjects: GE Environmental Sciences; H Social Sciences (General); HM1001 Social psychology; HM1106 Interpersonal relations. Social behavior; HM701 Social systems
• Online Access: http://irep.iium.edu.my/53008/1/SABAH%20CONFERENCE_ABSTRACT%20BOOK_FLOOD%20CDR%20_ORAL.pdf; http://irep.iium.edu.my/53008/2/CERT%20SABAH_ORAL.pdf; http://irep.iium.edu.my/53008/

Introduction: In responding to the post-2015 “Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction” (UNISDR 2015), countries across the globe have emphasized the important role of local government and community organization support in implementing community resilience programs. However, despite the Malaysian Government acknowledging the need to review and redevelop Malaysia’s sustainable disaster recovery policies and post-disaster rebuilding programs, the level of Malaysia’s community disaster resilience and cohesiveness and how to measure it are unknown. Aim: To discover the association between disaster resilience and social cohesion among flood affected communities in Kelantan, Malaysia to inform development of sustainable disaster recovery policies at both local and national level. Methodology: A cross-sectional study design was employed using Buckner’s Index of Cohesion (BIC) and the Index of Perceived Community Resilience (IPCR) to survey members (communities) of six Kelantan flood affected areas over six-month period in 2015. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 386 respondents. SPSS statistical software (version 20) was used for descriptive and inferential analysis of the survey response to generate the findings. Results: A total of 386 respondents’ completed the questionnaire (100% returns rate). Most respondents were female (211; 54.7%), stayed in their village and had a low income. Marital status (positive but weak relationship; r (95) = 0.108, p = 0.017), education level (negative; inverse correlation; r (95) = -0.142, p = 0.003) and injury during emergencies or disasters (negative and weak relationship) correlated significantly with disaster resilience (r (95) = -0.111, p = 0.015). Living expenses were found to be significantly correlated (weak) (r (95) = 0.164, p = 0.001) with communities’ social cohesion. There was a moderate correlation (0.471) between disaster resilience status and social cohesion, varied strength of the relationship varied among communities. Mean intensity of cohesion and resilience scores showed a place-specific differentiation. Temporal phases of disaster recovery were recorded for each community. Conclusion: The association between community disaster resilience and social cohesion, and place-based variations indicates the need to provide support to develop resilience and cohesion to equally high levels in all flood affected communities. This finding may assist in developing sustainable disaster preparedness, response and recovery policy and practice.