Next Article in Journal
Determination of Changes in the Quality of Surface Water in the River—Reservoir System
Next Article in Special Issue
Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems (SDEWES)
Previous Article in Journal
Sustainable Management for Fresh Food E-Commerce Logistics Services
Previous Article in Special Issue
Introducing a Degrowth Approach to the Circular Economy Policies of Food Production, and Food Loss and Waste Management: Towards a Circular Bioeconomy
 
 
Article

Post-Disaster Infrastructure Delivery for Resilience

1
Metis Center for Infrastructure and Sustainable Engineering, School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-3005, USA
2
Cities Research Institute, School of Engineering and Built Environment, Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD 4111, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Krzysztof J. Wołosz
Sustainability 2021, 13(6), 3458; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063458
Received: 31 January 2021 / Revised: 14 March 2021 / Accepted: 16 March 2021 / Published: 20 March 2021
As climate change increases the frequency and intensity of disasters and associated infrastructure damage, Alternative Project Delivery Methods are well positioned to enable innovative contracting and partnering methods for designing and delivering adaptation solutions that are more time- and cost-effective. However, where conventional “build-back-as-before” post-disaster reconstruction occurs, communities remain vulnerable to future disasters of similar or greater magnitude. In this conceptual paper, we draw on a variety of literature and emergent practices to present how such alternative delivery methods of reconstruction projects can systematically integrate “build-back-better” and introduce more resilient infrastructure outcomes. Considering existing knowledge regarding infrastructure resilience, post-disaster reconstruction and project delivery methods, we consider the resilience regimes of rebound, robustness, graceful extensibility, and sustained adaptability to present the potential for alternative project delivery methods to improve the agility and flexibility of infrastructure against future climate-related and other hazards. We discuss the criticality of continued pursuit of stakeholder engagement to support further improvements to project delivery methods, enabling new opportunities for engaging with a broader set of stakeholders, and for stakeholders to contribute new knowledge and insights to the design process. We conclude the significant potential for such methods to enable resilient infrastructure outcomes, through prioritizing resilience alongside time and cost. We also present a visual schematic in the form of a framework for enabling post-disaster infrastructure delivery for resilience outcomes, across different scales and timeframes of reconstruction. The findings have immediate implications for agencies managing disaster recovery efforts, offering decision-support for improving the adaptive capacity of infrastructure, the services they deliver, and capacities of the communities that rely on them. View Full-Text
Keywords: post-disaster recovery; re-designing infrastructure; alternative project delivery methods; disaster resilience; stakeholder engagement post-disaster recovery; re-designing infrastructure; alternative project delivery methods; disaster resilience; stakeholder engagement
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Chester, M.; El Asmar, M.; Hayes, S.; Desha, C. Post-Disaster Infrastructure Delivery for Resilience. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063458

AMA Style

Chester M, El Asmar M, Hayes S, Desha C. Post-Disaster Infrastructure Delivery for Resilience. Sustainability. 2021; 13(6):3458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063458

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chester, Mikhail, Mounir El Asmar, Samantha Hayes, and Cheryl Desha. 2021. "Post-Disaster Infrastructure Delivery for Resilience" Sustainability 13, no. 6: 3458. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063458

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop