Wilkinson, S; Chang-Richards, A Y; Sapeciay, Z and Costello, S B (2016) Improving construction sector resilience. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 7(2), pp. 173-185. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: Improving the resilience of the construction sector helps countries recover quicker from crises and can assist with improving community resilience and recovery. This study aims to explore ways in which the construction sector might improve its resilience. Design/methodology/approach: This paper examined past disasters and the role construction plays to understand what and how better construction resilience can be built, and the impact this will have on recovery and reconstruction. Findings: The findings showed that after a crisis, the construction sector is called upon to manage building and infrastructure recovery and reconstruction. Construction organisations are needed by the community, as they provide physical resources, people, materials, logistics, management and technical expertise and rebuilding. To ensure that recovery and reconstruction programs are successfully implemented, it is necessary for the construction sector to be resilient. To achieve improved resilience in the construction industry, disaster resilience management needs to become mainstreamed into construction processes. Research limitations/implications: Although larger organisations have some preparation to respond to crises, including having emergency or disaster plans, smaller companies struggle to achieve a reasonable level of resilience. It appears that senior management and key people in construction organisations are familiar with the procedures but that the majority of staff in organisations lack knowledge and skills. Practical implications: Understanding the role the construction sector plays in disasters and providing directions for improving construction sector resilience will ultimately improve recovery and reconstruction outcomes. Social Implications: This paper discusses how communities rely on services provided by construction organisations to enable them to recover from emergencies and crises. Pre-disaster construction company resilience impacts on the ability of construction companies to function post-disaster. Originality/value: This paper focuses on a number of cases and shows where and how the construction sector has worked in disasters and provides a new analysis of the role the industry plays, and the various disaster stages where the industry has maximum impact.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | community-centred; construction performance; disaster mitigation; post disaster reconstruction; resilience; risk reduction |
| Index terms: | construction performance, community resilience, reconstruction, recovery, construction organization, construction industry, post-disaster reconstruction, disaster mitigation, construction company, rebuilding, disaster resilience, risk reduction, community-centred, construction sector, construction process, methodology, program |
| Subjects: | building construction, community engagement, industry analysis, environmental hazards, post-disaster and reconstruction, research methods, software systems, financial risk, social equity, operations management, performance assessment, organization, climate science |
| Topics: | Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Stakeholder Management, Sustainability, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Site Management |
| 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