Funding mechanisms for disaster recovery: can we afford to build back better?

MacAskill, Kristen; Guthrie, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.058

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It involves engaging appropriate skillsets and methods (Abe et al , 2018; Kumar et al , 2015) to minimise any rework tendencies while exploiting modern techniques to mitigate or alleviate the effects of new construction industry risks, such as congestions from urbanisation, retrofitting and climate change. Ensuring accessible funding sources are readily available (Macaskill and Guthrie, 2018), effective procurement collaborations (Johannessen et al , 2014) and the management of resources that also embraces waste management in all forms (Moon et al , 2017), acts as financial conservator methods.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of factors affecting post-disaster reconstruction projects resilience

Charles

Chang‐Richards

Yiu

2021

IJDRBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the literature on resilience factors applied to post-disaster reconstruction projects and to develop a guiding framework to assist in their strategic selection and application. Design/methodology/approach A systematic review was undertaken on the literature’s account in four major bibliographic databases to elicit resilience factors contributing to improving post-disaster reconstruction projects' robustness. Through summative content analysis and open-coding of research outputs over the past decade, the factors identified informed the development of a conceptual framework that can significantly impact the built environment’s resilience development process. Findings The review found 24 resilience factors open-coded into five criteria groups: governance, innovations, reconstruction approaches, resource management and stakeholder expectations. While these factors have influenced reconstruction projects, the recently increased participation of clients and end-users in construction management accentuates their strategic selection and applications. Research limitations/implications The research focused on English language articles; therefore, any claim to a comprehensive resilience factors listing can be amiss. The framework provides a platform for developing clear measurement indicators for allocating project resources and determining resilience deficiencies. Practical implications Results confirm the designs and assessment of a resilient built environment extends beyond the traditional structural characteristics, but includes the ability of the integrated network of buildings and infrastructure to support the continuous delivery of the community’s social and economic services in normal and post-disaster settings. Originality/value The review is very specific as it attempts to develop a novel conceptual framework for guiding developers and practitioners in the application of resiliency to post-disaster reconstruction projects.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of factors affecting post-disaster reconstruction projects resilience

Charles

Chang‐Richards

Yiu

2021

IJDRBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar to insurance coverages, funds allow the rapid mobilization of financial resources, circumventing time-consuming approval procedures and negotiations for accessing other financing sources after a disaster has occurred [67]. However, as funds are rather difficult and complex to set up, they are usually designed for circumstances where insurance coverages are neither available nor cost-effective.…”

Section: Fundsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genebanks at Risk: Hazard Assessment and Risk Management of National and International Genebanks

Herbold,

Engels

2023

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genebanks are crucial for safeguarding global crop diversity but are themselves exposed to several risks. However, a scientific basis for identifying, assessing, and managing risks is still lacking. Addressing these research gaps, this study provides risk analysis for three key risk groups: natural hazards, political risks, and financial risks, carried out on a sample of 80 important national and international genebanks, comprising at least 4.78 million accessions or roughly 65% of the reported total of ex situ conserved accessions worldwide. The assessment tool of Munich Re “Natural Hazards Edition” allowed a location-specific comparison of the natural hazard exposure. Results showed that genebanks in the Asia-Pacific region are most exposed to natural hazards, while institutions in African and some Asian countries are rather vulnerable to political risks. Financing is a major problem for national genebanks in developing countries, whereas the Global Crop Diversity Trust achieved considerable financial security for international genebanks. Large differences in the risk exposure of genebanks exist, making a location- and institution-specific risk assessment indispensable. Moreover, there is significant room for improvement with respect to quality and risk management at genebanks. Transferring risks of genebanks to third parties is underdeveloped and should be used more widely.

show abstract

“…This can be construed as a demonstration of their interest in ensuring that resources are optimised, especially in the face of scarcity. Adopting proactive measures such as pre-disaster identification of financial sources can eliminate or reduce scouting and negotiating time during the time-sensitive recovery period (Macaskill and Guthrie, 2018). Strategic preventative maintenance programs, with a propensity for proactively addressing issues relating to critical infrastructure and building, augers well for eliminating sudden disasters (Andri c and Lu, 2017).…”

Section: Critical Infrastructure Indexingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Providing a framework for post-disaster resilience factors in buildings and infrastructure from end-users’ perspectives: case study in Caribbean island states

Charles

Chang‐Richards

Yiu

2022

IJDRBE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to elicit the expectations for resilient post-disaster rebuilds from Caribbean project end-users. In anticipation of future climatological, meteorological, hydrological or geophysical disasters disaster, key stakeholders can articulate and incorporate strategies for resilience development, thus leading to improved end-users’ satisfaction and confidence. Design/methodology/approach This paper engages the results of a systematic literature review that identified 24 empirical resilience factors for post-disaster reconstruction projects. These factors informed a semi-structured questionnaire to elicit the perspectives of Caribbean end-users on a seven-point Likert scale. The quantitative analysis of both factor ranking and principal component analysis was performed to identify correlations and provides further interpretations on the desires of the end-users for resilient rebuilds. Findings The results presented in this paper highlight the collective perspectives on the Caribbean end-users on what they perceived to be aiding more resilient reconstruction projects. They identified reconstruction designs mindful of future hazards, policies that aid climate change mitigation, active assessment of key structures, readily available funding sources and ensuring stakeholder’s unbiased interest as the top-most empirical factors. Factor analysis suggested collaborations with inclusive training and multi-stakeholder engagement, critical infrastructure indexing and effective governance as the critical resilience development factors. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is first of its kind to explore the perspective of the Caribbean people regarding disaster reconstruction projects. It addresses developmental avenues for measurement indicators towards resilience monitoring and improvement. Additionally, the perspectives can provide construction industry professionals with tools for improved operational resilience objective-setting guidance, for Caribbean construction.

show abstract

Funding mechanisms for disaster recovery: can we afford to build back better?

Cited by 16 publications

References 3 publications

A systematic review of factors affecting post-disaster reconstruction projects resilience

A systematic review of factors affecting post-disaster reconstruction projects resilience

Genebanks at Risk: Hazard Assessment and Risk Management of National and International Genebanks

Providing a framework for post-disaster resilience factors in buildings and infrastructure from end-users’ perspectives: case study in Caribbean island states

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About