Han, F (2021) Measurement of resilience performance for infrastructure construction project delivery. PhD thesis, University of New Mexico, USA.
Abstract
In the past decade, infrastructure resilience in the U.S. has become critical due to increasing disruptions to the built environment and the resultant consequences on economic, social, and environmental goals. This attention to resilience research is drawn to investigating the ability of existing structures and facilities to resist and recover from natural and human-caused hazards. From a broader view, resilience also applies to processes, such as infrastructure project delivery processes. During these processes, a project often suffers inevitable threats and disruptions, which can significantly delay or derail the project if the process is not resilient.This research aimed to conceptualize resilience for project delivery processes and develop a measurement approach that can be used to diagnose the resilience of infrastructure project delivery systematically. Several steps were taken to accomplish this research objective. The author defined resilience as the ability of the project delivery system to withstand disruptions with the goal of mitigating the disruption-induced gap to intended project results. The proposed resilience definition highlights resistance, recovery, adaptation as the three stages for a project to respond to disruptions. The three resilience stages provide the fundamental dimensions from which seventeen resilience factors were identified to measure resilience in the context of road construction project delivery. The significance of the proposed resilience factors was verified by industry experts through a structured survey questionnaire. Based on the survey data, the author developed resilience criteria and the Project Delivery Resilience Index (PDRI) to evaluate the resilience of different project delivery methods: Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B), Design-Build (D-B), and Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC). Furthermore, Tendency toward Inoperability (TI) was developed to quantitatively measure the project delivery resilience in the case that the project delivery process is considered a system consisting of different project phases linked to each other by interdependent input-output relationships. To compute the TI, the author proposed an inoperability-based model that holistically measures the variations of project phase-related TI before and after disruptive events. Thus, the gain in resilience for the project delivery system can be solved.The findings of this research add to the body of knowledge by advancing the understanding of the resilience of project delivery and providing a comprehensive means to incorporate resilience assessment into infrastructure project delivery, and eventually improve the resiliency of completed infrastructure.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Halter, S |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; hazards; measurement; construction project; infrastructure construction; infrastructure project; project delivery; road construction; variations; delivery method |
| Index terms: | body of knowledge, infrastructure construction, construction manager, questionnaire, variation, construction project, survey, general contractor, infrastructure resilience, project delivery, infrastructure project, dimension, built environment, road construction, adaptation, design-bid-build, delivery method, recovery |
| Subjects: | health monitoring assessment and metrics, project delivery, profession, data collection methods, risk management, delivery method, infrastructure and transport systems, civil engineering, contractual condition, operations management, contractual arrangements, knowledge management, user focus, practitioner, production management |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Procurement, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Contract Administration, Information Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
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