With regards to the impact of community on individual health and wellbeing, it is worth considering the impacts of culture when building resilience in populations. The extent to which different cultures promote individualism (most developed nations including Australia, UK and US) versus collectivism (most developing nations, e.g. Brazil and China) will have differential impacts on resilience. Individualistic cultures characterise the individual as an active, independent agent, detached from the physical and social environment in which they live. By contrast, in collectivist cultures, the individual is seen as a responsive agent connected to the physical and social environment; wellbeing becomes less subjective and more relevant to the objective standards of others \citep*{Ryff_2014a}. Wellbeing - and the various strategies that can employed to promote it - will therefore vary across cultures \cite{Eckersley2006}, dependent on people’s values and goals, and influenced by culture \citep*{DIENER_1997a}. Take for example, the cultural diversity in the expression of gratitude \cite{Floyd_2018}. Speakers of English and Italian are more likely to express gratitude in everyday situations than speakers of other languages including Polish and Russian. Other research has demonstrated that collectivist cultures - in this case, the Taiwanese - do not experience changes in state gratitude, positive affect or negative affect when practising gratitude \cite{chang}, perhaps because they are fulfilling expected role obligations. Finally, it is important to note that community values and subsequent behaviours can be influenced through sociostructural factors such as governmental policies, a consideration highlighted in our original GENIAL model \cite{Kemp_2017} and a topic to which we return when discussing behavioural change in section \ref{225494}.