Community Residents’ Preparedness for Volcanic Eruptions: An Integrated Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) framework

  • Authors

    • Dr. Stephanie Nadine M. Labrador Batangas State University, The National Engineering University
    • Dr. Nickie Boy A. Manalo, CPME, CMMS, COMS Batangas State University, The National Engineering University
    https://doi.org/10.14419/xj0yh052

    Received date: June 24, 2025

    Accepted date: July 28, 2025

    Published date: August 2, 2025

  • Disaster Preparedness;‎ Volcanic Hazards;‎ Structural Equation Modelling;‎ Risk ‎Communication; Community Resilience; Disaster Tool Kit

  • Abstract

    This study investigates the determinants of community preparedness for volcanic eruptions in Batangas ‎using an integrated Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) framework. Employing a mixed-methods design, the ‎research combined a structured survey and focus group discussions to assess the roles of hazard knowledge, media ‎reliance, risk perception, subjective norm, attitude, and perceived behavioral control among residents, barangay ‎officials, and disaster risk reduction officers. Stratified sampling ensured representation across high-risk and ‎vulnerable groups. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, SEM, and thematic analysis. Results revealed ‎that subjective norm (β = 0.59), perceived risk proximity (β = 0.63), and media reliance (β = 0.57) were the strongest ‎predictors of preparedness, while hazard knowledge alone was insufficient to drive action without supportive ‎community structures and resources. Notably, preparedness levels were higher among residents with strong social ‎networks and frequent engagement with official risk communication channels. However, gaps in resource access ‎and persistent misinformation on social media hindered effective preparedness, particularly among marginalized ‎groups. The study proposes a multi-channel, community-driven disaster risk reduction framework and the ‎development of the "Bantay Bulkan Para sa Mamamayan" toolkit to enhance capacity-building, information ‎verification, and inclusive preparedness strategies.

  • References

    1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
    2. Becker, J. S., Potter, S. H., McBride,S. K., Wein, A. M., & Davies, A. (2017). When the earth doesn’t stop shaking: How experiences with-prolonged earthquake sequences affect risk perception and preparedness in Wellington, New Zealand. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduc-tion, 21, 404–411.
    3. Bird, D. K., et al. (2010). Risk perception and volcanic hazard mitigation: Individual and community responses. Journal of Volcanology and Geo-thermal Research, 190(3-4), 299–310.
    4. Donovan, A. R., & Oppenheimer, C. (2014). Science, policy, and place in volcanic disasters: Insights from Montserrat and Iceland. Geoforum, 52, 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.08.009.
    5. Haynes, K., et al. (2008). Volcano risk perception and preparedness in a high-risk area. Natural Hazards, 45(3), 287–304.
    6. Houston, J. B., et al. (2012). The centrality of communication and media in disaster resilience. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(2), 270–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214548563.
    7. Kurata, M., et al. (2022). Behavioral factors influencing evacuation during volcanic eruptions. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 76, 102982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102982.
    8. Lindell, M. K., & Perry, R. W. (2012). The Protective Action Decision Model. Risk Analysis, 32(4), 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x.
    9. Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1983). Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19(5), 469–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(83)90023-9.
    10. Paton, D. (2019). Disaster risk reduction: Psychological perspectives on preparedness. Australian Journal of Psychology, 71(4), 375–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12237.
    11. Paton, D. (2013). Disaster resilient communities: Developing and testing an all-hazards theory. Journal of Integrated Disaster Risk Management, 3(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5595/idrim.2013.0050.
    12. Relief Web. (2021).Disaster communication in the Philippines. https://reliefweb.int/report/phi lippines
    13. Sabo-o, L. C., et al. (2025). Barriers to disaster preparedness in high-risk communities: The case of Lemery, Batangas. Asia Pacific Journal of Disas-ter Risk Reduction, 8(1), 77–89. ScienceDirect. (2024).
    14. Solberg, C., et al. (2010). Public perception of preparedness measures for natural hazards. Risk Analysis, 30(4), 503–515.
    15. Tang, C., et al. (2019). Disaster awareness and preparedness among residents in areas prone to natural hazards: A Chinese perspective. Natural Haz-ards, 96(1), 275–294.
    16. UNDRR. (2022). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Labrador , D. S. N. M. ., & Dr. Nickie Boy A. Manalo, CPME, CMMS, COMS. (2025). Community Residents’ Preparedness for Volcanic Eruptions: An Integrated Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) framework. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 14(4), 24-32. https://doi.org/10.14419/xj0yh052