Laugé, A; Hernantes, J and Sarriegi, J M (2015) Analysis of disasters impacts and the relevant role of critical infrastructures for crisis management improvement. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 6(4), pp. 424-437. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose – Disasters are complex phenomena, by diverse nature and whose management is complicated. An efficient analysis of potential impacts that may result as consequence of a disaster has to be conducted to improve the preparation and response in face of future events. Design/methodology/approach – A review of impact evaluation methodologies and real disasters' impacts has been performed to develop an impact indicators' framework. Then, a questionnaire has been administered to critical infrastructure (CI) operators to identify CI dependencies and their consequences. Findings – A proper impact analysis improves learning about the consequences of a disaster and the way those impacts should be managed. Moreover, current impact evaluation methodologies do not make special focus on CIs even if their proper functioning is essential for society’s welfare. Crisis managers such as civil protection, emergency services and local authorities among others need to be aware of the importance of critical infrastructure s when managing a disaster. Also crisis managers and managers of CIs need to know how dependencies make impacts spread from one CI to others or to different sectors. Social implications – Through an efficient management, the development of preventive measures and response programs can help to mitigate impacts' harshness for CIs and for the whole society and may even prevent future disasters. However, if crisis managers and managers of CIs are unaware of disasters consequences, their management will result inefficient. Originality/value – A holistic and dynamic analysis of disaster impacts has been performed. The integration of impact indicators together with their behaviour over time analysis will help improving future crises management.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | crisis management; damage assessment; disaster mitigation; disaster prevention; disaster response; infrastructure management |
| Index terms: | critical infrastructure, damage assessment, crisis management, disaster mitigation, infrastructure management, disaster response, impact analysis, questionnaire, integration, methodology, program, local authority, face, society, disaster prevention, manager |
| Subjects: | infrastructure engineering, financial risk, software systems, research methods, structural engineering, environmental hazards, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, sociology, emergency and crisis management, organizational analysis, practitioner, data collection methods, data analysis and analytics, psychology |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Sustainability, Cost Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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