Abudu, Haruna Domanamwin; Mewomo, Cecilia Modupe; Adjei, Kofi Owusu and Bondinuba, Francis Kwesi (2026) The influence of technical and non-technical emergency response systems on infrastructure resilience. Journal of Construction Business and Management, 8(S1), pp. 30-47. ISSN 2521-0165
Abstract
This study evaluates the impact of Emergency Response Systems (ERS) on infrastructure resilience in the Ashanti Region of Ghana using a quantitative research approach. A questionnaire survey was administered to 225 professionals, including facility managers, engineers, architects, building inspectors, and NADMO officials, yielding 159 valid responses. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics, such as means and standard deviations, and exploratory factor analysis and partial least squares structural equation modelling.The findings indicate that both technical and non-technical ERSs significantly affect infrastructure resilience, with nine technical and seven non-technical ERSs receiving high performance ratings. Economic factors, such as property damage, and socio-political issues, including low wages, were closely linked to ERS effectiveness. Key challenges identified included inadequate consideration of cultural factors, limited institutional capacity, and insufficient funding. These challenges were strongly influenced by technical (β = 0.223, p < 0.05) and non-technical (β = 0.462, p < 0.05) ERS elements. Consequently, these limitations affected economic (β = 0.195, p < 0.05) and socio-political (β = 0.325, p < 0.05) outcomes, highlighting the interdependence between ERS components and broader systemic resilience. In practice, the study emphasises the need for integrated ERS planning within broader institutional, legal, and socio-economic systems by government agencies and facility managers. It advocates for targeted technological investments, legal frameworks, community education, and long-term risk management strategies. This study presents a novel interdisciplinary framework that integrates engineering and policy perspectives. Its originality lies in the comprehensive assessment of both technical and non-technical ERS components, offering valuable insights for strengthening infrastructure resilience in developing contexts.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | emergency response, disaster, facilities, infrastructure resilience, natural hazard |
| Index terms: | emergency response, statistics, strengthening, strategy, economic factor, deviation, infrastructure resilience, effectiveness, funding, structural equation modelling, survey, exploratory factor analysis, manager, quantitative research, risk management, natural hazard, questionnaire, interdependence, wages, Ghana, partial least square, architect, engineer, government agency |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, economic concepts, Geography, structural engineering, environmental hazards, risk management, organizational analysis, risk assessment, practitioner, profession, economic analysis, statistical analysis, business economics, mathematical modelling, management, safety engineering, data analysis and analytics, administrative law, financial and cost management, performance management |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Legal Issues, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Roles and Professions, Human Resources, Risk Management, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Quality Management, Organizational Design, Sustainability, Engineering Principles |
| 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