Abstracts – Browse Results
Click on the titles below to expand the information about each abstract.
Viewing 18 results ...
Agyekum, K, Hammond, S F and Salgin, B (2021) Occupants' perceived importance and satisfaction with the indoor environmental quality of a green building. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 627-42.
Amarachukwu Nnadozie, N and Wilkinson, S (2021) Building code amendment and building resilience: perspective of building code users in New Zealand. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 643-59.
Ayda Montaser, K and Heidari, S (2021) Optimizing window size by integrating energy and lighting analyses considering occupants' visual satisfaction. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 673-86.
Dewagoda, K G, Perera, B and Senaratne, S (2021) A "knowledge value chain" framework for contractor organisations to maximise chances of winning tenders. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 577-93.
Ekanayake, E, Shen, G Q and Kumaraswamy, M (2021) Supply chain resilience: mapping the knowledge domains through a bibliometric approach. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 705-21.
Ghomi, S G, Wedawatta, G, Ginige, K and Ingirige, B (2021) Living-transforming disaster relief shelter: a conceptual approach for sustainable post-disaster housing. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 687-704.
Khatibi, H, Wilkinson, S, Baghersad, M, Heiman, D, Ramli, H, Suhatril, M, Javanmardi, A and Ghaedi, K (2021) The resilient-smart city development: a literature review and novel frameworks exploration. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 493-510.
Kumarasiri, B and Dissanayake, P (2021) Barriers to implementing waste-to-energy projects in Sri Lanka: a PESTEL analysis. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 544-58.
Mayara Regina, M and Tavares, S F (2021) Materials passport's review: challenges and opportunities toward a circular economy building sector. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 767-82.
Nandun Madhusanka Hewa, W, Pan, W and Kumaraswamy, M (2021) Social network analysis applications in sustainable construction and built environment management: a review. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 511-28.
Olajide, J F, Ajayi, O O, Kudirat Ibilola, Z and Adenuga, O A (2021) Climatic conditions and the resilience of buildings along Lagos coastline. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 738-49.
Perera, G, Tennakoon, T, Kulatunga, U, Jayasena, H S and Wijewickrama, M (2021) Selecting suitable procurement system for steel building construction. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 611-26.
Perera, S, Senaratne, S, Rodrigo, M N N and Brady, L (2021) Analysis of embodied carbon and cost profiles of school buildings in Australia. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 660-72.
Ranadewa, K, Sandanayake, Y G and Siriwardena, M (2021) Enabling lean through human capacity building: an investigation of small and medium contractors. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 594-610.
Ratnasabapathy, S, Alashwal, A and Perera, S (2021) Exploring the barriers for implementing waste trading practices in the construction industry in Australia. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 559-76.
Sirimewan, D C, Mendis, A, Damitha, R, Samaraweera, A and Naiduwa Handi Chathuri, M (2021) Analysis of issues in sustainable water management of irrigation systems: case of a developing country. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 529-43.
Tariq, H, Pathirage, C and Fernando, T (2021) Measuring community disaster resilience using Q-methods: a physical resilience perspective. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 722-37.
- Type: Journal Article
- Keywords: resilience; Q-methods; disaster management; physical infrastructure; disasters; emergency preparedness; infrastructure; workshops; stakeholders; absorptivity; decision making; local government
- ISBN/ISSN:
- URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-03-2020-0053
- Abstract:
Decision-makers, practitioners and community members have a need to assess the disaster resilience of their communities and to understand their own capacities in disaster situations. There is a lack of consensus among researchers as to what resilience means and how it can be measured. This paper proposes a novel technique to achieve consensus among stakeholders on definitions, objectives and indicators for measuring a key dimension of community disaster resilience (CDR), physical infrastructure (PI). This study uses a five-step approach utilizing Q-methods to contextualize a resilience index for PI. Interviews, focus groups and Q-sorting workshops were conducted to develop a tool that ranked measures according to stakeholder preference. A total of 84 participants took part in the workshops across four countries (United Kingdom, Malaysia, Pakistan and Sri Lanka). The initial set of 317 measures was reduced to 128 and divided into the three community capacities of anticipatory, absorptive and restorative. The physical infrastructure capacity assessment tool (PI-CAT) was then finalized to have 38 indicators that were also ranked in order of importance by the participants. The PI-CAT can be useful for local governments and communities to measure their own resilience. The tool allows stakeholders to be confident that the metrics being used are ones that are relevant, important and meet their requirements. The Q-method approach helps stakeholders to develop and use a community capacity assessment tool that is appropriate for their context. The PI-CAT can be used to identify effective investments that will enhance CDR.
Wijewansha, A S, Tennakoon, G A, Waidyasekara, K and Ekanayake, B J (2021) Implementation of circular economy principles during pre-construction stage: the case of Sri Lanka. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 11(4), 750-66.