Built-in resilience through disaster risk reduction: Operational issues

Bosher, L (2014) Built-in resilience through disaster risk reduction: Operational issues. Building Research & Information, 42(2), pp. 240-254. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

It has been argued that the broad range of people responsible for the delivery, operation and maintenance of the built environment need to become more proactively involved in making the built environment resilient to a wide range of known and unforeseen hazards and threats. Accordingly, the (actual and potential) roles of a wide range of stakeholders associated with the integration of disaster risk reduction into the (re-)development of the built environment are examined. A review of literature, government data and interviews with key stakeholders in England highlights that despite regulatory intentions to increase local resilience through the use of public and private sector stakeholders, a number of structural and operational obstacles exist. A range of strategies can be employed to overcome these obstacles: revisions to building codes, tightening planning policy, improving professional training, clarifying roles and missions, enabling complementary bottom-up and top-down approaches, and the provision of good-practice guidance about the broad range of structural and non-structural risk reduction measures. Many of the operational challenges are non-structural and require a coherent, overarching strategy: changing and aligning the social understandings and practices in civil society, government and built environment stakeholders.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: built environment; disaster mitigation; governance; proactive strategies; professionals; resilience; risk reduction; stakeholders
Index terms: private sector, strategy, interview, England, governance, risk reduction, operation and maintenance, local resilience, planning policy, building code, disaster risk reduction, integration, disaster mitigation, civil society, built environment
Subjects: data collection methods, business, public policy, Geography, financial risk, management, maintenance engineering, regulatory law, industry analysis, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, political science, environmental hazards, organizational analysis
Topics: Organizational Design, Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Stakeholder Management, Governance, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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