Measuring Community Resilience: An Empirical Evaluation of Two Instruments

Abstract

Communities’ attempts to recover from disasters will be strengthened if efforts are guided by evidence about community resilience and its underlying components. However, both the definition and operationalization of community resilience are disputed. Currently, there is no single measurement of resilience for all elements comprising resilience for all communities. Exploring what constructs and dimensions of resilience are measured by community resilience instruments may elucidate what components of community resilience are being measured by a particular instrument. This research focuses on two empirical approaches to measure community resilience: The Conjoint Community Resilience Assessment Measure (CCRAM) and the Communities Assessing Resilience Toolkit (CART) to ascertain whether the CCRAM and CART measure a single emergent construct unifying the two instruments or if the instruments measured separate, but related constructs. Comparative psychometric properties of the measures were examined. Data were analyzed using theory-driven Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) models. All CFA models were constructed using Weighted Least Squares Means Variance-adjusted estimators. Model fit was estimated by examining the Comparative Fit Index, the Tucker-Lewis Fit Index, the Root-Mean-Square of Approximation, and the Standardized-Root-Mean-Residual. Results indicate the CCRAM and the CART do not measure the same unifying construct; they each represent their own separate, yet related unifying factors. The individual latent variables in the CCRAM and the CART have generally acceptable psychometric properties. An agreed upon definition of community resilience continues to elude the field. However, studies that compare and contrast measurements of the construct illuminate the core underlying components of the construct providing evidence for common ground about the key components of community resilience. The findings of this research may serve to aid in determining which instrument measuring community resilience is preferred based on the goals of those measuring it as well as the context and community in which it is being measured.