Amaratunga, D; Malalgoda, C I and Keraminiyage, K (2018) Contextualising mainstreaming of disaster resilience concepts in the construction process. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 9(4-5), pp. 348-367. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: Construction industry and the built environment professions play an important role in contributing to society’s improved resilience. It is therefore important to improve their knowledgebase to strengthen their capacities. This paper aims to identify gaps in the knowledgebase of construction professionals that are undermining their ability to contribute to the development of a more disaster resilient society. The paper also provides a series of recommendations to key actors in the built environment on how to more effectively mainstream disaster resilience in the construction process. Design/methodology/approach: The paper reports the findings of 87 stakeholder interviews with: national and local government organisations; the community; non-governmental organisations, international non-governmental organisation and other international agencies; academia and research organisations; and the private sector, which were supplemented by a comprehensive analysis of key policies related to disaster resilience and management. The findings were validated using focus group discussions that were conducted as part of six organised stakeholder workshops. Findings: The primary and secondary data generated a long list of needs and skills. Finally, the identified needs and skills were combined “like-for-like” to produce broader knowledge gaps. Some of the key knowledge gaps identified are: governance, legal frameworks and compliance; business continuity management; disaster response; contracts and procurement; resilience technologies, engineering and infrastructure; knowledge management; social and cultural awareness; sustainability and resilience; ethics and human rights; innovative financing mechanisms; multi stakeholder approach, inclusion and empowerment; post disaster project management; and multi hazard risk assessment. The study also identifies a series of recommendations to key actors in the built environment on how to more effectively mainstream disaster resilience in the construction process. The recommendations are set out in five key themes: education, policy, practice, research and cross-cutting. Research limitations/implications: This study is part of an EU funded research project that is seeking to develop innovative and timely professional education that will update the knowledge and skills of construction professionals in the industry and enable them to contribute more effectively to disaster resilience building efforts. Originality/value: The paper provides an extensive analysis of the gaps in the knowledgebase of construction professionals that are undermining their ability to contribute to the development of a more disaster resilient society. Accordingly, the paper recommends major changes in construction education, research, policy and practice with respect to mainstreaming disaster resilience within the construction process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; construction; disaster resilience; education; knowledge gaps |
| Index terms: | mainstreaming, disaster resilience, focus group, society, interview, empowerment, local government, compliance, knowledge management, agency, human rights, methodology, construction process, construction education, secondary data, ethics, private sector, governance, workshop, disaster response, project management, non-governmental organization, construction industry, business continuity, built environment, academia, profession, risk assessment, innovative financing, construction professional |
| Subjects: | institututions, criminal law, climate science, construction type, data collection methods, business, ethical practice, economic analysis, health safety and environment, project management theory and practice, project risk, financial risk, professional development, management, research methods, infrastructure and transport systems, industry analysis, administrative law, communities and social development, political science, emergency and crisis management, educational institutions, sociology, building construction, professional education |
| Topics: | Human Resources, Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Education, Site Management, Research Practice, Project Management, Information Management, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Governance, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions |
| 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