A Community Resilience Motivation Model: integrating socio-economic and socio-emotional drivers for post-disaster recovery in cultural heritage destinations

Purpose: This study develops a Community Resilience Motivation Model (CRMM) by integrating Tri-Reference Point (TRP) theory with Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction (CBDRR) to examine post-disaster recovery in cultural heritage tourism contexts. It explains recovery as a sequential motivational process in which socio-economic and socio-emotional factors jointly shape community resilience and support for recovery Design/methodology/approach: Structural equation modelling was applied to survey data from 1,548 residents of Gaziantep, Türkiye, a UNESCO Creative City of Gastronomy affected by the 2023 earthquakes. The model positions recovery trajectories within a motivational framework, identifying minimum requirements, resilience as status quo, and intentions to stay and invest as goal states. Findings: Government support and economic dependency emerged as critical minimum conditions initiating an externally driven state of ‘forced resilience’. Sustained recovery commitment depended on internalised socio-emotional bonds, including place attachment, place identity, and community solidarity. Community resilience fully mediated the effects of socio-economic and socio-emotional factors on recovery support, and the results challenge linear recovery assumptions by introducing Cultural Resilience Capital (CRC) as a conceptual extension capturing intrinsic, community-rooted motivations. Originality: The study shows how tourism-dependent communities transition from externally driven forced resilience to sustained, agency-based recovery, extending TRP from individual to community level and integrating it with CBDRR in a tourism-specific framework. It positions CRMM as a process model in which socio-emotional and socio-economic drivers are converted into recovery action through the mediating mechanism of community resilience. Research limitations/implications: The model was tested in a single cultural heritage city; cross-cultural applications would strengthen generalisability. Practical implications: Policymakers should balance immediate economic support with strategies that build community resilience by strengthening local bonds, social capital, and cultural identity to enable self-directed recovery. Social implications: Reinforcing community identity and solidarity is as essential as economic revitalisation for recovery, particularly in heritage destinations where livelihoods and cultural meaning are tightly interconnected.