ABSTRACT
In recent years the concept of ‘resilience’, the capacity of human and physical systems to respond to extreme events, has become increasingly prominent in disaster research. Indeed Tierney and Bruneau (2007) argue that the concept has largely supplanted the concept of ‘resistance’ with its focus on pre-disaster mitigation. This may reflect the realisation that the changing nature of natural and human-induced threats are such that built assets can never really be future-proofed to be totally resistant. The contemporary focus therefore has shifted to ensuring the capability of the built environment to both resist and recover rapidly following a disaster event. Despite the theoretical attractiveness of this proposition however, the structure of the construction industry and the nature of the interaction between those who plan, design, construct, operate and maintain the built environment provides a problematic context within which to integrate disaster risk management concepts. The socio-political landscape of the industry and professions arguably act as fundamental impediments to the achievability of this goal. Building-in resilience will therefore demand a paradigm shift in the way that built environment professionals integrate their activities and interact with the communities within which built assets reside. The preceding chapters have explored the challenges facing the built environment and have examined the strategies that must now be taken if built-in resilience is to be realised in the future and built assets safeguarded. This concluding chapter seeks to reflect on these contributions and examine the implications for future practice.
