Labaka, L; Hernantes, J and Sarriegi, J M (2015) A framework to improve the resilience of critical infrastructures. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 6(4), pp. 409-423. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to present a resilience framework for critical infrastructures (CIs) taking into account internal and external stakeholders involved in a crisis situation and covering the four resilience dimensions defined in the literature, as well as providing practical policies to facilitate their implementation in practice. Design/methodology/approach – The research methodology consists of an iterative process in which different research methods such as group model building, multiple case study and Delphi method are applied to gather knowledge from experts in the field. Findings – This study presents a holistic and easily applicable framework for CIs where: first, a list of resilience policies is defined and second, the influence of each resilience policy in the three resilience life-cycle stages is assessed. Originality/value – This study overcomes three of the main limitations that current resilience building frameworks have: some of them only focus on one resilience dimension without covering the four resilience dimensions of resilience, most of them only focus on internal stakeholders without taking into account external stakeholders, and finally, most frameworks limit to describe the framework theoretically without explaining how it can be implemented in practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | crisis management; Delphi method; disaster prevention; infrastructure management; resilience; resilience building policies |
| Index terms: | disaster prevention, methodology, external stakeholder, resilience building policy, Delphi method, case study, infrastructure management, research methodology, crisis management, critical infrastructure, implementation, dimension |
| Subjects: | sociology, infrastructure and transport systems, research methods, financial risk, infrastructure engineering, contractual arrangements, health monitoring assessment and metrics, data collection methods, policy studies, research design and methodology |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Procurement, Governance, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here