Hwang, S; Park, M; Lee, H S; Lee, S and Kim, H (2015) Postdisaster interdependent built environment recovery efforts and the effects of governmental plans: Case analysis using system dynamics. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 141(3), ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Because diverse functional losses of the overall built environment (e.g., buildings, industrial facilities, and civil infrastructure) from a disaster event cause tremendous inconveniences to refugees, it is essential to implement swift recovery plans. However, in a postdisaster recovery situation, when resources and time are severely limited, there exist difficulties in implementing appropriate plans. These difficulties are attributable to a lack of comprehensive understanding of the overall recovery processes, caused by associated interdependency among the functions of a facility/infrastructure and the dynamic features of multiple recovery efforts. Thus, this research develops a system dynamics (SD) model to understand overall recovery efforts in the whole region from a holistic perspective. Based on an actual disaster case (the 2011 earthquake of Tohoku), this research conducts a case study to analyze the effectiveness of governmental plans. The simulation results show that governmental plans primarily aimed at recovering the daily lives of populations may not always be helpful for rapid restoration operations. The findings also suggest that considering the associated interdependency among built environment functions in recovery planning is key to supporting not only the rapid functional recovery of the facilities but also the improvement of poor restoration work environments. In this situation, the timely uses of preplanned and government-centered recovery programs (e.g., temporary housing and temporary debris movement) can be more effective with a comprehensive understanding of dynamic features in interdependent and multiple recovery efforts. Further, it is expected that these analytical capabilities have the potential to support recovery planners both in developing effective special recovery programs and in providing improved institutional strategies. Policy implications and lessons learned from a past recovery case can also be helpful in providing specific guidelines for future disaster recovery planning.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case studies; computer-aided simulation; disaster recovery; dynamic analysis; project planning and design; rehabilitation |
| Index terms: | program, planner, lessons learned, earthquake, restoration, movement, work environment, effectiveness, system dynamics, Tohoku, computer aided simulation, built environment, refugee, policy implication, case study, disaster recovery, temporary housing, strategy, recovery, project planning, population, disaster recovery planning |
| Subjects: | operations management, software systems, emergency and crisis management, management, renovation and retrofit, performance management, modelling and simulation, control systems, environmental hazards, professional development, health behaviours and lifestyles, computing systems, demography, data collection methods, specific urban areas and projects, Geography, profession, infrastructure and transport systems, policy studies |
| Topics: | Governance, Geographical Context, Urban Studies, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Project Management, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Information Management, Organizational Design, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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