1. 災變社會政策與實務的「感性」與「理性」 ~~ 政府與 NGOS 的合作、國際與在地的連結 2011 年 6 月 13 日 -14 日 National Taiwan University Conceptual and Practical: A Multi-disciplinary Approach to Resilience for Disaster Recovery Dr Vicky Tan Singapore

2. Multi-disciplinary Approach  The world is multi-faceted and complex and an inter-disciplinary approach is vital in understanding disasters and crises and their impact.  Psychology, social work, history, economics and geography all can contribute to the understanding resilience in disaster recovery.

3. Asian Culture and Disaster Recovery  Emphasis is on community and family contributing to coping  Officials engaged in physical constructions and weather observations to prevent disasters or lesser the damage of disasters.  Government also developed comprehensive strategies in disaster relief and recovery.

4. Historical and Cultural In event of prolong natural disaster, the Chinese emperor would  issue imperial edict to blame himself for not fulfilling his responsibility of taking care of the country.  leads the people in making an offering and atonement to heaven. Spiritual responses rooted in traditional Chinese value that the emperor is the appointed governor by heaven From Yu the Great King, to Meng Zhi, this idea is deeply rooted in China people's mind.

5. Economic and Social Factors: Risk and Resilience  Resilience and vulnerability can be attributed to various factors such as social and economic variables.  Resilience may be correlated to population characteristics such as social class, age and life’s circumstances.

6. Multi-dimensional Concept of Resilience  Levels of Coping: 1. Individual variable 2. Family variable 3. Community variable  Factors 1. Psychological factors 2. Social factors 3. Economic factors

7. Individual Resilience  Resilience is the “capacity of people to cope with stress and adversity” (Masten, 2009).  The ability to bounce back or be able to regain normal functioning.  Resilience is often viewed as an individual trait.  Resilience can also be viewed as “a process, and not a trait of an individual” (Rutter, 2008).

8. Family Resilience  The family is vital source for individual growth, well-being, physical and emotional support.  Family buffer against stress and crisis and prevent secondary (e.g. development of PTSD after exposure to trauma), and tertiary (e.g., preventing the worsening of PTSD once it has emerged) effects of trauma and disaster (Harvey & Tummala-Narra, 2007 ).

9. Community Resilience  Community resiliency and vulnerability (Corwin, 2002) can be attributed to various factors such as social and economic variables.  At risk populations due to social class, age and life’s circumstances.  Effective social network and coordination of public, private and non-profit actors in disaster intervention is fundamental in planning and practical steps in recovery (Zachour, n.d. tm ).

10. Measuring Community Resiliency  Conceptual framework for understanding community resilience as a function of three dimensions of community (Cutter et. al. (2008): 1. Social Vulnerability: the social and economic conditions within a community that elevate hazard risk; 2. Structural (or Infrastructure) Vulnerability: the conditions of man-made structures and infrastructure that elevate hazard risk; 3. Environmental (or Natural Systems) Vulnerability: the exposure (proximity) to disasters  Cutter et al. also integrate three vulnerability types and mitigation strategies as separate data layers using a “hazards of place model.”

11. Individual Social Resiliency Outcomes Satisfaction with personal relationships Individual is aware of social vulnerabilities & where to seek community assistance. Individual is a member of community organization. Individual is employed by a major employer. Individual has home insurance for natural disasters.

12. Measures of Resilience Attributes  Measures at both the community and individual level.  The objective is to measure resilience in post-event communities in order to model resiliency as a function of pre-event attributes.

13. Resiliency  Research has shown that the psychological prepared, socially connected and economically resourced tended to be more resilient:  the poor, due to limited choices and living in vulnerable neighborhoods such as over-crowded environment,  more likely to live in high-risk areas with decreased resiliency.

14. Coping with Crises  Crisis theory, the ability for reorganization and attaining a level of functioning that is better than expected, is dependent on resources available, both at the individual as well as community level.  The coping capacity depends on individual skills and resources as well as those afforded by society to overcome the crisis.  Disaster recovery, resilience is the active process by which survivors are able to access strengths or resources in some areas “in order to secure recovery in others”.

15. Overcoming Disasters  Key to overcoming disaster lies in the resilience of people and community to surmount the odds and build hope for the future.  Crisis is an opportunity for development and growth.

16. Intervention  Intervention that uses the inherent resilience and building coping and resources  Can be a catalyst for social change.

17. Building Community Resilience  Community resiliency is associated with empowerment.  For recovery process, social capital and resilience are keys:  Bonding capital: cohesiveness and social support networks  Bridging capital: applied to integrating services, so that they are responsive, flexible and accountable.

18. Defining Resilience  Some agreement amongst researchers that resilience is a dynamic process (Gordon, 1995; Chang 2003),  Term is fairly ill-defined, substantial variations in operationalization and measurement of the construct (Luthar, Cicchetti & Becker, 2000).  Miller (2003) acknowledged the difficulties in conceptualising resiliency and labelling specific behaviours as indicators of resiliency.  Clearly, clarity and consistency are needed in the use of definitions and terminology in resilience research (Cicchetti & Becker, 2000).

19. Measuring Resilience in Adults  In recent years several adult resilience scales have been developed ( e.g., Baruth & Carroll, 2002; Beasley, Thompson, & Davidson, 2003; etc.).  Some scales ( e.g. Baruth & Caroll, 2002; Friborg et al., 2003 ) measure personality and environmental factors, some ( e.g. Wagnild & Young, 1993; Klohnen, 1996 ) focus on resilient personality and ignore external factors.  Some ( BFPI: Baruth Protection Factors Inventory ) used mainly restricted population (i.e., young female Hispanic Americans and Anglo Americans).  Could not be fully generalised to other populations, cultures or races.  Most used Western populations to test their resilience scales.

20. Measuring Resilience in Adults  Some (eg.Holleran & Waller, 2003) suggested that environmental factors affecting resilience can only be investigated in the specific culture and context.  Their study involved Mexican youths, found that participants who identified more closely with their traditional Mexican American core values and beliefs had greater resilience.  strong cultural identification may be a protective factor, contributes to resilience.  Chang et.al (Chang, Kow, Low & Lee, 2002 ) highlighted importance of cultural aspects in the resilience construct.  Their Chinese Resilience Scale (CSR: Chang et al., 2002) measures a 3- dimensional Chinese resilience construct (incremental self-beliefs, emotional self-regulation and coping flexibility) and Malay Resilience Scale examined a 3-dimensional Malay resilience construct (religious beliefs, religious attribution and religious practice).  Chang et al’s (2002) scales focus more on internal resilience and the indigenous culture aspects, they do not take environmental factors such as social support, into account.

21. Resilience Factors Defined in Various Adult Measures Wagnild & Young, 1993 (Resilience Scale) Klohnen, 1996 (Ego-Resilience Scale) Baruth & Carroll, 2002 (Baruth Protection Factors Inventory)  Personal competence;  Acceptance of self and life  Confident optimism;  Productive & autonomous activity;  Interpersonal warmth & insight;  Skilled expressiveness  Adaptable personality;  Supportive environment;  Fewer stressors; Compensating experiences

22. Resilience Factors Defined in Various Adult Measures Friborg et al., 2003 (Resilience Rating Scale for Adults) Connor & Davidson, 2003 (Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale) Chang, 2003 (Chinese Resilience Scale) Chang, 2003 (Malay Resilience Scale)  Personal competence;  Social competence; Family coherence;  Social support; Personal structures  Personal competence, high standards & tenacity;  Trust in one's instincts, tolerance of negative affect & strengthening effects;  Positive acceptance of change & secure relationships;  Control; Spiritual influences  Incremental self-beliefs; Emotional self-regulation;  Coping flexibility  Religious beliefs; Religious attribution;  Religious practice

23. Developing a Resilience Scale for a Singaporean population  Literature review, focus groups  Gain some consistency in definitions of resilience, whilst including constructs unique to target culture  Constructs are 1. Personal competence, 2. Positive outlook, 3. Self-knowledge, 4. Interpersonal skills, 5. Social support and 6. Spiritual / Religious influences

24. Personal Competence  Competence - promotes resilience  Summarised the items that reflect competence in various studies, the ability to achieve personal goals through determination and tenacity.  Competence - flexible & adaptable in change, a sense of control.  Competence related to coping, health & well-being, use productive coping strategies more & maladaptive coping styles less.  Coping is a response to stress and a means to develop resilience.  Coping styles affect how a stressful event is perceived & managed, can determine types of outcomes when faced with problems, e.g. effective coping enhances self-beliefs & capacity to cope with difficult situations.  No best coping style. Approach or active coping styles like problem-focused coping, positive reframing, self-directed coping and acceptance of problem result in better outcomes when dealing with problem.  In contrast, avoidance coping fosters poorer outcomes.  Optimistic appraisals, adaptive coping styles help change perceptions of stressful events to less stressful ones.  Coping skills help facilitate resilience.

25. Positive Outlook  Positive outlook related to optimism, looks forward or expects better things in future. Oriented to view matters in hopeful ways (e.g., finding joy in life and acceptance of failure).  View adversity as challenge not threat. Optimistic viewpoint important, but firmly based in reality.  E.g. Heiman (2002), study of parents of child with disability found acceptance of the disability a major component of resilience, along with strong belief in the child and optimistic outlook.  Positive outlook- realistic perspective, optimistic view of challenges.  Positive emotions mediate relations between pre-crisis resilience and later depressive symptoms; & pre-crisis resilience and post-crisis psychological resilience.  Many resilience scales identified factors that reflect positive outlook.  Overall, positive outlook help foster resilience, see adversities, stressful events as challenges, believe one has capabilities & means to overcome difficulties but firmly rooted in reality.

26. Self-Knowledge  Related to Kobasa’s (1979, 1982) concept of hardiness,  Self-knowledge allows committed individual to know what he/ she is involved in but also why the involvement was chosen (i.e., making meaning).  Is necessary for accurate assessment and competent handling of life’s situations.  Self-knowledge includes confidence, belief in one’s capability.  Accepts personal strengths and weaknesses, able to effectively allocate resources to deal with life situations.  Can develop resilience in an individual as he/she has a realistic understanding of own abilities.  Adaptive functioning, by tapping on strengths and improving on weaknesses.

27. Interpersonal Skills  The Ego-Resilience Scale ( Klohnen, 1996 ) consists of a component on interpersonal warmth & insight with items on ease of communication with others.  Interpersonal skills essential in promoting alliances, lead to forming interpersonal relationships.  Skills and confidence in social interactions, handling social contacts through communicating thoughts and feelings, managing behaviour and asking for help when needed.  Interpersonal skills necessary in building resilience as individuals could not live in isolation, especially during times of adversity.  Good interpersonal skills help one to obtain the necessary resources he/she requires during difficulties.

28. Social Support  Social support help buffer effects of negative life events.  Social support is an important stress-resistance resource.  Individuals often draw strength and courage from encouragement and support provided by social network.  Seeking a combination of social support is an expression of resilience in parents of children with disabilities (Heiman, 2002).  Availability of good relationships within/outside the family indicates family resilience.  Perceived presence of social support also enhances an individual’s capacity to deal with life’s.

29. Spiritual / Religious Influences  Spiritual beliefs and religion play significant roles in individuals’ lives.  People tend to fall back on them in times of great stress.  Research shows a positive relationship between religious involvement and adult health outcomes and stress coping (e.g., McCullough, Larson, Hoyt, & Koenig, 2000).  Religion important for family resilience (Greeff & Van der Merwe, 2004).  In Singapore context, Chang (2003) found that the Malays are influenced by Islamic teachings, great implications on their styles of dealing with adversity. The six factors listed above are deemed to be related to one another. E.g. a positive outlook in life and a high level of self-knowledge could result in greater competency. Also, good interpersonal skills, could build up good network of social support. next step was to test their validity in a Singaporean population.

30. Procedure Focus Groups  To generate items, ascertain meaning of the factors identified in the target population, group interaction and greater insight into why certain opinions are held.  a wide range of information and potentially important understanding of the concept of resilience and language crucial to the development of the scale/instrument (Krueger, 1994).

31. Results  Data from the focus groups audiotapes transcribed and analysed.  Confirmed that six constructs indeed reflect concepts related to resilience.  Generated 337 items for the six constructs.  Items were reduced to under 200 by having four individuals (two university undergraduates and two working adults) examine & classify the pool of 337 items into one of the six categories – “Personal Competence”, “Positive Outlook”, “Self-knowledge”, “Interpersonal Skills”, “Social Support” and “Spiritual/Religious Influences”.  Retained Items with 100% inter-rater agreement among the four raters.  To further reduce the number of items, excluded items with similar meaning. Result -165 items for the Adult Resilience Scale.  Further refinement revised it to the 85 items RARS (Revised Adult Resilience Scale)

32. Adult Resilience Scale (ARS, Tan, 2006)  ARS (Tan, 2006) was developed in an Asian context to assess the role of protective resources for individuals when encountering challenges.  6 factors as relevant constructs of resilience: 1. Personal Competence, 2. Positive Outlook, 3. Self-Knowledge, 4. Interpersonal Skills, 5. Social Support and 6. Spiritual/Religious Influences. A preliminary version with 165 items was developed and validated with a sample of 296 undergraduates and 173 working adults. The ARS evidenced good psychometric properties.

33. Revised Adult Resilience Scale (RARS, Tan, 2006) Subsequently the ARS was further reduced to a Revised Version of 85 items using items with good item to total correlation. Construct validity was demonstrated by positive correlation with measures of hardiness and lack of correlation with a sex role stereotype scale. Respondents with higher resilience scores differ from those with lower scores significantly in their use of coping strategies. The RARS may prove to be a valid and useful local measure.

36. Revised ARS Scale (Tan, 2006) RARS-PC Personal Competence Subscale PC1 AR1. I don’t give up easily once a goal has been set. PC7 AR12. Overcoming stress in difficult for me*. RARS- PO Positive Outlook Subscale PO1 AR33 There is nothing worth looking forward to in my life*. PO7 AR46 Even in tough situations, one should never lose hope in life. RARS-SK Self-Knowledge SK3 AR63. I am confident in applying my strengths. SK7 AR69. I often feel insecure about myself*.

37. Revised ARS Scale (Tan, 2006) RARS-Sp Spiritual influences subscale Sp1 AR94. God or fate takes care of the things in life. Sp4 AR99. My spiritual beliefs allow me to thrive in negative situations. RARS-ISk Interpersonal Skills subscale ISk8 AR122. I feel confident and assured when I meet people for the first time. ISk14 AR130. I find it hard to interact with others and so I prefer to keep to myself*. RARS-IS Interpersonal support subscale IS1 AR137. In times of uncertainty, I have some, in my family or social circle that I can turn to. IS9 AR149. I cannot count on anyone in this world*.

38. Resilience in Disaster Coping  Ability to make emotional connections with others is a fundamental ingredient of resiliency.  Survivors to draw meaning from their experiences and to extend this meaning to helping others, especially loved ones.

39. Building Resiliency  The process of building resiliency involves both internal and external processes.  It means both self confidence or self efficacy trust in the community.

40. Building Resiliency  Promoting Resilience of the disaster affected population:  use of psychotherapeutic techniques to enhance resilience of victims are vital for the social-psychological recovery.

41. Building Resiliency: Spiritual support  Faith in God provides strength to overcome stress and promotes recovery from traumatic disorders.

42. Strengthening Family Resilience  Strengthening relationships is a vital aspect of promoting resilience.  Role of the family and social support system, as the most important resource, for social recovery (Dynes, 2000).  Social support could be both tangible and emotional like encouragement, advice, and companionship.  Family relationship variables contribute to family resilience.

43. How to build resilience? Building personal resilience during disaster recovery, both workers and clients, can do the following:  Connect with others 1. Talk about your feelings and share your concerns with someone you trust 2. Reach out and offer help to someone else; accept help that is offered to you 3. Engage in social activities; spend time with others who share common interests 4. Build family cohesion and strengthen relationships

44. Tips on building Resilience  Foster an optimistic outlook 1. View change as a challenge or opportunity; think about how the future might be better 2. Review your priorities; abandon unreachable goals and adopt new ones 3. Be confident in your abilities; recall how you have successfully faced adversity in the past

45. Tips on building Resilience  Act purposefully 1. Retrace the past and plan for the future 2. Develop realistic goals; take small steps toward those goals each day 3. Avoid negative reactions; focus on actively coping with disaster-related distress 4. Take good care of your body; eat nutritious meals and get adequate rest

46. Conclusions  Build resilience and coping: at individual, family and community levels.  Social intervention aims to enhance personal competence, resources and positive interaction in family culture and environment.  ARS provides a measure of resilience for assessment and intervention in disaster recovery.

47. Conclusions  Asian societies develop into more caring communities and strong social capital  provide active support for one another in crisis,  Resilience is necessary to ensure effective coping in times of crisis and disaster and effective recovery of communities.

48. Thank you

49. Appendix 1: Revised Adult Resilience Scale Dr Vicky Tan, 2006, Copyrighted, email: vickytanlm@gmail.com.

55. Appendix 2: Basis of Resilience Nature of Resilience: Individual and Community  Social (1) (2)  Economic (3) (4) (Cutter, Mitchell and Scott, 2000)

56. Basis of Resilience (1) Individual Social Resiliency Outcomes  Satisfaction with personal relationships  Individual is aware of social vulnerabilities & where to seek community assistance.  Individual is a member of community organization.  Individual is employed by a major employer.  Individual has home insurance for natural disasters.

57. Basis of Resilience (2) Community Social Resiliency Outcomes  Transportation corridors are not proximate to environmental vulnerabilities.  Local government has emergency and economic recovery plans.  Community adopts International Building Code.  Community adopts long-term land use and transportation planning.  Community has redundant communications.

58. Basis of Resilience (3) Individual Economic Resiliency Outcomes  Individual time before re-employment (after the disaster event).  Individual current income relative to pre-event.  Individual job satisfaction relative to pre-event.  Familial/friendship network relative to pre-event.  Time to family/friends relative to pre-event.

59. Basis of Resilience (4) Community Economic Resiliency Outcomes  Community satisfaction relative to pre-event.  Community access to shopping relative to pre- event.  Number and activity of community organizations.  Time before reopening by major employers.  Number of employers relative to pre-event