Harre-Young, S B L D A R J G J (2012) Incorporating security measures into the built environment. In: Smith, S D (ed.) Proceedings of 28th Annual ARCOM Conference, 3-5 September 2012, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
The protection of the built environment has been given increasing attention over recent years, with physical interventions being integrated into the built environment itself and an impetus on the role of those who are responsible for its design, construction and operation. Of particular note has been debate and behaviour surrounding the incorporation of security measures to specifically mitigate terrorist threats, as varying perceptions regarding obligations and incentives to do so have resulted in vulnerable places remaining unprotected. As part of on-going research into the security of the built environment, a three-year study into the protection of crowded places from terrorism has determined the factors that influence whether such measures are incorporated into built assets, in order to further understanding of the perceptions and reality behind decision making. Drawing on data obtained from interviews with 47 construction management and security professionals in the UK and USA, as well as observations during site visits and document analysis, a framework is put forward that presents the factors that influence whether security measures are incorporated, as well as the factors that influence the value of the measures themselves. The framework highlights the need to consider the incorporation of physical measures during the early design stages while also reconciling the requirements of such measures against those of other design criteria; to understand the intricacies surrounding risk mitigation within time and cost constraints, and to accrue maximum value. Such a framework, it is argued, would aid policy and key decision makers in co-ordinating their efforts and effectively protecting vulnerable places from the range of risks that the UK faces, thereby mitigating a range of natural hazards and major accidents, not just specific threats.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | counter-terrorism; design; risk; safety; security |
| Index terms: | early design stage, built asset, risk mitigation, built environment, decision-making, natural hazard, terrorism, face, drawing, document analysis, interview |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, environmental hazards, decision analysis, asset management, financial risk, design process, terrorism studies, data science, psychology, technical documentation, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Organizational Design, Design Practice, Urban Studies, Sustainability, Risk Management, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Cost Management |
| 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