5 9

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

INTRODUCTION

Providing permanent housing to disaster victims isone of the most critical and time-consuming activi-ties in the post-disaster reconstruction process. Asshown in figures 1 and 2 the Federal EmergencyManagement Agency (FEMA), the FloridaDepartment of Community Affairs and the FloridaDivision of Emergency Management predict thatpermanent housing may take up to five years torealise from the time of the disaster’s impact. For anaverage citizen, this is a very long time period towait to restore their normal livelihood. As manyexperts term it, a ‘new normal’ is therefore set inmany circumstances rather than providing exactlywhat existed previously.

Long-term solutions such as permanenthousing are as important as the emergency reliefprovided after a major natural disaster.Prefabricated modular structures can provide aholistic approach to permanent housing recon-struction in disaster-struck areas. As analysed in thispaper, many of the common issues that have arisen

in previous post-disaster permanent housing recon-struction programmes can be provided with highlytime-efficient and holistic solutions through modu-lar construction.

The many inherent characteristics of mod-ular structures, as listed below, allow for a speedyconstruction as well as a solution that is friendlier tothe end user. Some of the relevant characteristics ofmodular structures are as follows:-

• All components of a building, including stairs, liftshafts, façades, corridors and services can beincorporated in such modules.• The modules are mass produced in a quality con-trolled production facility ensuring greater qualitycontrol as well as more beneficial economies ofscale. • A module’s shape and size can vary to suit adesired architectural plan, where the dimensionsmay only be limited according to the transportationarrangements such as truck dimensions and heightrestrictions on roads that need to be travelled onduring transport of the modules.

Tharaka Gunawardena, Tuan Ngo, Priyan Mendis, Lu Aye, Robert Crawford

Abstract

With many natural disasters such as earthquakes, cyclones, bushfires and tsunamis destroying human habitats around

the world, post-disaster housing reconstruction has become a critical topic. The current practice of post-disaster recon-

struction consists of various approaches that carry affected homeowners from temporary shelters to permanent hous-

ing. While temporary shelters may be provided within a matter of days as immediate disaster relief, permanent hous-

ing can take years to complete. However, time is critical, as affected communities will need to restore their livelihoods

as soon as possible. Prefabricated modular construction has the potential to drastically improve the time taken to pro-

vide permanent housing. Due to this time-efficiency, which is an inherent characteristic of modular construction, it can

be a desirable strategy for post-disaster housing reconstruction. This paper discusses how prefabricated modular struc-

tures can provide a more time-efficient solution by analysing several present-day examples taken from published post-

disaster housing reconstruction processes that have been carried out in different parts of the world. It also evaluates

how other features of modular construction, such as ease of decommissioning and reusability, can add value to post-

disaster reconstruction processes and organisations that contribute to the planning, design and construction stages of

the reconstruction process. The suitability of modular construction will also be discussed in the context of the guidelines

and best practice guides for post-disaster housing reconstruction published by international organisations. Through this

analysis and discussion, it is concluded that prefabricated modular structures are a highly desirable time-efficient solu-

tion to post-disaster housing reconstruction.

Keywords: Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction, Prefabricated Modular Structures, Natural Disasters, Time-Efficient

Construction.

TIME-EFFICIENT POST-DISASTER HOUSING RECONSTRUCTION WITH PREFABRICATED MODULAR STRUCTURES

6 0

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

• There is minimal work on-site to complete thebuildings as the façade and interiors themselvesform parts of the modules.• The modules can easily be removed from themain structure for future reuse or relocation. Manydeveloped economies now have a market for usedmodular units.• Modular construction at present reduces con-struction time by over 50% from a site-intensivebuilding (Lawson et al, 2012).• Reduced construction time means that the mod-ular houses become habitable for the end usersmuch sooner than it would after the completion of

a conventional construction. In addition to the above mentioned char-

acteristics, Rogan et al (2000) assess the costsand benefits of modular construction as againsttraditional construction, for a typical four-storeyresidential building in London. Where the initialinvestments have only been a mere 2 per centhigher for modular construction, it has shown toreap far greater benefits than the traditional con-struction approach, from the beginning of theusable life of the structure. With a 39 per centgreater turnover estimated and a 43 per centhigher Internal Rate of Return (IRR), modularconstruction was clearly shown to provide morebenefits to the builder as well as the client.

This paper thus evaluates how these fea-tures of prefabricated modular structures can beused to provide a holistic and speedy solution topost-disaster housing reconstruction issues com-

monly raised by many of the major disasters thathave occurred around the world.

PRE FA BR IC ATED MODULAR HOUSE SIN REAL WORLD APPL ICAT IONS

Although the concept of prefabricated modules isonly beginning to gain popularity worldwide, quitea few such buildings have already been built andinhabited in many developed countries. Almost allof these buildings are residential, and there is anincreasing demand for this construction technique

Figure 2. Probable post-disaster phased activity for a major disaster

scenario (Florida Department of Community Affairs and FloridaDivision of Emergency Management, 2010).

Figure 1. Post-disaster recovery and reconstruction timetable (FEMA, 2005).

6 1

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

fordmainly due to the speed at which the final products

are realised.Prior to applying the technology to post-

disaster applications, it must be observed how theconcept is applied in real world applications. A fewexamples from around the world are describedbriefly to observe how prefabricated modular con-struction has become established as a practicalcommercial building methodology.

L i t t l e He ro bui ld ing, Melbourne,Aus t ra l ia

The low-rise apartment building ‘Little Hero’ inMelbourne, Australia consists of 58 single-storeyapartment modules and 5 double-storey apartmentmodules (see figure 3). The authors were part of thedevelopment team for this project. The eight mod-ular stories were assembled with finishes withineight days, and the building was constructed at asite with a very narrow access road, therebydemonstrating some of the many advantages ofmodular construction.

Domino Hous ing 21, Spa in

This is a four-storey structure built in Spain, wheremodules can be added or dismantled as the clientpleases. The time taken to set up the full structure

once planned is just 15 days. The building speaksvolumes for the speed of construction that modularconcepts provide, as the units can be added withadditional boxes to add spaces and customise theexisting ones even further.

S tuden t hous ing bu i ld ing ,Wolverhampton, UK

This 25 storey structure is claimed to have beencompleted in just 27 weeks of work on-site (see fig-ure 4). Lawson et al (2012) explains this as a 50per cent saving from the on-site time estimated fora site-intensive construction; they have estimatedthe productivity in terms of savings in man-hours asan 80 per cent improvement from a site-intensiveconstruction. In general, Lawson et al (2012) statethat modular construction can reduce site wastageup to 70 per cent compared to site-intensive con-struction methods.

Therefore, not only have modular struc-tures proven time-efficient, but they have alsoproven to be more environmentally friendly, provid-ing energy-efficient solutions. As discussed byLawson et al (2012) in general prefabricated mod-ular buildings have proven to reduce constructionwaste considerably and this is mainly throughmeans of minimised off-cuts (Osmani et al, 2006).This in turn will result in significantly improved effi-ciency in energy, cost and time of construction.

Figure 3-1. Little Hero Building (modular building in Melbourne, Australia).

6 2

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

Pos t -Kat r ina hous ing , Miss i s s ipp i, USA

Due to the large housing demand which followedthe Hurricane Katrina disaster in 2005, muchresearch has gone into improving the previouslyused ‘FEMA Trailers’ and to implement modularconstruction for temporary housing. A design byArchitect. Marianne Cusato inspired this modularhouse, which was named the ‘Katrina Cottage’ (seefigure 5). It was designed to be installed with a floor

area of 27.8 square metres. However this wasimproved to incorporate a more permanent hous-ing solution with 20 different cottage models thatallowed for future extensions (McIntosh, 2013).

Hai t i pos t -ea r thquake recons t r uc t ion -t emporar y hous ing

Following the Haiti earthquake in 2010, theCanadian Embassy in Haiti carried out the installa-tion of 46 modular housing units as temporaryshelter for 75 individuals (see figure 6).

INTERNATIONAL GUIDEL INES ONPOST-DISASTER HOUSINGRECONSTRUCTION

FEMA (2005) and Oxfam (2003) define the terms‘Shelter’ and ‘Housing’ with respect to post-disasterrelief operations. Both institutions identify shelter astemporary dwellings, provided until such time thatthe affected people could be moved into more per-manent houses. Shelters are meant to be only atemporary safety net for the displaced to protectagainst diseases, health issues and further disasters.

In a more non-traditional context, ShelterProject. org (2003) defines a shelter as a“Habitable covered living space, providing asecure, healthy living environment with privacy anddignity to those within it.”

‘Housing’ on the other hand is identified aspermanent dwellings, which are associated withnecessities in the form of physical, social andadministrative infrastructure. This in turn reflects theneed of permanent housing to cater to the liveli-hoods of the disaster-affected communities in thelong run.

Many agencies such as Oxfam (2003),APEC (2009) and UNDRO (1979) have identifiedthat the transfer of technical know-how to the par-ties involved in a disaster relief operation can slowdown or affect the process adversely. It is under-stood that most disaster relief operations includethe help from many non-technical parties such aslocals including the disaster victims themselves. Asmost of them may not be experts in constructiontechnology, the knowledge gap will affect a masshousing construction operation in a very adversemanner.

As many locals show a great deal of enthu-siasm during the post-disaster housing process,Oxfam (2003) suggests the following ‘pre-emptivestrategies’ to handle the inputs:

• “Matching technology to capacity” – This

Figure 3-2. Little Hero Building (modular building in

Melbourne, Australia).

Figure 4. 25-storey student housing building in

Wolverhampton, UK (source: Lawson et al, 2012).

6 3

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

involves an initial study on the individuals that areinvolved in the process, and the time commitments,expertise and skills that can be expected from them.• “Project schedules should be realistically based”

- This is to ensure that the housing process makeseffective use of the parties involved and their exper-tise and skills.• “Building model houses” – This will provide a

Figure 5. The original ‘Katrina Cottage' (source: McIntosh, 2013).

Figure 6. Modular housing units installed by the Canadian Embassy in Haiti (source: Sullivan Land Services, 2010).

6 4

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

better understanding to the planners as well aseveryone involved as to how the full process willpan out. All involved parties can identify what theycan expect in the real process.

Oxfam (2003) further identifies the impor-tance of the technological know-how in dealingwith construction materials.

In addition to the construction-relatedissues discussed here, HIC-HLRN and PDHRE(2005) have identified human rights related con-cerns that need to be addressed in a post-disasterhousing process. It strongly suggests that no reset-tlement programme should be undertaken withoutconsidering internationally recognised humanrights being in place. In general, it strongly statesthat the livelihoods of affected individuals should bereinstated as soon as possible to ensure that theirnatural development is not hindered or damagedbeyond repair.

PO ST -D I SASTE R HOU S ING RE CO N-STRUCTION IN THE PAST

Post-disaster recovery processes for many of therecent disasters have been recorded by the partiesinvolved and it is worthwhile to examine them. Thisgives an understanding as to which key problemshave occurred more commonly and which mayneed an innovative solution. The post-disasterreconstruction processes of the following disastersare studied here as case studies:

• Housing reconstruction in Turkey following theKocaeli Earthquake in 1999.• Housing reconstructions in Sri Lanka, India andIndonesia following the 2004 Indian OceanTsunami.

• Housing reconstruction in Pakistan following theKashmir Earthquake in 2005.• Housing reconstruction in Japan following the2011 Tsunami.

Table 1 shows a summary of the background dataof these natural disasters and Table 2 is a summa-ry of the housing reconstruction undertaken. This isa depiction of the magnitude of damage that nat-ural disasters of this nature can cause, and howlong it can take to permanently restore the liveli-hoods of those affected.

Studies carried out on the post-disasterhousing reconstruction of the above mentionedcases are analysed to identify how a modular con-struction can solve many of the commonly facedissues as identified through these examples.

KEy IS SUES IN THE RE CONSTRUC-T ION PRO CE SS AND SO LUT IO NSOFFERED By MODULAR HOUSING

Although different in magnitude and nature, thedisasters studied in this paper have provided a setof common issues to the process of reconstructinghouses. It is useful to therefore identify some ofthese key issues and then assess how a smart solu-tion can be provided through modular construc-tion. Explained below is how these issues were iden-tified by many researchers who analysed these post-disaster processes.

Time

People displaced due to natural disasters needassistance in restoring their original livelihoods.

Table 1. Background details of the natural disasters of the analysed case studies.

6 5

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

Therefore time is a critical factor, as restoring theirlives needs to be done as early as possible. Tas etal (2010) have identified ‘time’ to have a signifi-cantly higher rank over the other factors that deter-mine the design of post-disaster permanent hous-ing (see figure 7).

In the above mentioned case studies, thefinished housing projects have taken at least fiveyears to complete. This is a considerably long timefor disaster-struck communities to wait to rebuildtheir lives. Weerakoon et al (2007) identified howfactors such as inflation and foreign exchange ratefluctuations have drastically increased the price ofconstruction materials over a lengthy stretch of time(see figure 4) and the changes in wages for labourover time (see figure 5), which made the recon-struction process in Sri Lanka costlier than it shouldhave been.

Time efficiency of modular construction isone of the key features that make it a highly desirednew technology. As Lawson et al. (2012) claims,modular buildings can reduce construction time by

Table 2. Reconstruction data summary for the natural disasters of the analysed case studies.

Figure 7. Ranking of the determining/restricting factors in

permanent housing design – with respect to the Kocaeli-Turkey earthquake in 1999 (source: Tas et al, 2010).

Figure 8. Price changes through time of imported and local

construction materials (source: Weerakoon et al, 2007).

Figure 9. Changes through time in wages for labour

(source: Weerakoon et al, 2007).

6 6

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

almost 50% compared to more conventional site-intensive constructions.

Many houses can be simultaneously builtthrough mass production facilities and also simul-taneously installed on-site, which will cut down con-struction time. This time saving means that theaffected communities can recommence their liveli-hoods much sooner. Further, the funding for theproject will also make greater savings by avoidingtime fluctuations in material and labour costs andexchange rates.

Resource avai labi l i ty and in teg ra t ion

yan et al (2010) have categorised resources as“Government-driven, Market-driven and Donor-dri-ven” prior to identifying the related issues. Theyhave identified that although government-drivenoperations have an initial advantage of price andrate interventions from the government, eventuallythey succumb to economic factors such as inflationof material prices and rises in wages. Donor-drivenprocesses have shown a lack of capacity in havingresources available. Market-driven processes areseen as the most desirable in terms of performanceand results, but they lack support from the stake-holders such as governments and humanitarianagencies.

In a later study, yan et al (2011) identifiedfive main types of factors that affect resource avail-ability in post-disaster reconstruction, namely:

• Market- related factors• Logistics-related factors• Project-related factors• Organisation-related factors• Environment-related factors

Tas et al (2011) have reported that almost 16 dif-ferent contractors were involved in the reconstruc-tion process after the Kocaeli earthquake in Turkey.This is a large number of different firms working onthe same project, which would eventually require agood platform of integration.

Although modular construction as a tech-nology may not solve the resource availability issue,it has the potential to considerably reduce the bur-den of finding resources. Many logistics-relatedfactors as stated by yan et al (2011) can bereduced by having almost all of the operations run-ning under one manufacturing plant; whereas in asite-intensive construction different resources wouldneed to be called upon at different times by differ-ent contractors.

Arshad and Athar (2013) in their study onthe rehabilitation after the Kashmir earthquake

have pointed out that engaging a limited number ofparties in the reconstruction process is a key successfactor. Modular construction by its characterinvolves a minimum number of parties, as thehouse is already built by the time it arrives on site.Most of its construction is done as pre-organisedmass production, which is streamlined and willmostly not be affected by the nature of the situation.Most processes are already integrated before mod-ular units are assembled on site. Modern integra-tion techniques, such as Building IntegrationModelling (BIM), can also be applied easily to sup-port the design and planning process of modularconstruction.

Further, Rogan et al (2000) have stated thatthe ‘lead-in time’ from ordering to delivery can becut down to as low as 6 to 8 weeks if the productshave been prototyped previously through projectsof similar nature. This may vary with the location inconsideration and how far away it is from a pro-duction facility. It is advisable therefore, for a disas-ter management organisation to have typicaldesigns for several types of modules to suit differentpost-disaster conditions. Since these module typeswill be predesigned and pre-engineered it willimprove the planning and lead-in times consider-ably. However, this suggests that if the partiesinvolved in disaster relief operations can plan earlyand be prepared, ideally before disaster strikes,they will benefit tremendously with modular con-struction.

Considering the large amount of housesoften required following a natural disaster, supplierswill need to possess capability to deliver large num-ber of modules at short notice. However, modularconstruction would still be the best equipped tocater to this large demand as economies of scalewill largely benefit modular construction asopposed to traditional means (Rogan et al 2000).

Ava i labi l i t y and sk i l l s o f work fo rce

As observed from the data in Tables 1 and 2, thenumber of houses that need rebuilding after alarge-scale natural disaster can be extremely large.This requires an appreciably large workforce, whichmay be unrealistic to be found at once. Arshad &Athar (2013) acknowledge that lack of knowledgeand/or skills of the locals assisting was a key issueduring the reconstruction process in Pakistan afterthe 2005 Earthquake.

The expertise for the construction of a mod-ular housing unit is mostly needed inside the man-ufacturing facility. Once the modules arrive on site,they will only require a minimum amount of labourfor the installation process. As mentioned previous-

6 7

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

fordly, it is observed that local communities volunteer

during many housing reconstruction processes, andthe expertise needed in the on-site construction ofmodular houses is minimal where they can providea better and more efficient service. The activityneeded on-site can be as minimal as tightening afew nuts and bolts, and local volunteers with mini-mum work experience could be trained easily tocarry out these tasks.

Lack o f e xper t i se in p lanning

As previously mentioned, publications such asOxfam (2003) and Roosli et al (2012) identified alack of expertise and knowledge in the relevantauthorities about the process of housing recon-struction acting as a major setback in the housingreconstruction process. They also identified theimportance of all approaches and plans being inte-grated as a universal plan, which is lacking in manylarge-scale post-disaster housing operations.

A high percentage of the constructionprocess of a modular structure is a pre-plannedprocess carried out in a factory environment. Theprocess to construct a module from its raw materi-als should not require any drastic changes evenduring a post-disaster reconstruction scenario.

External parties would only get involved inthe on-site construction and for integrating theinfrastructure. Modular units are generally built withprovisions for services. It is only a matter of con-necting them on-site once the modules are assem-bled. Further, since the interiors as well as façades,roofs, etc. are all pre-constructed into the modules,the planning required becomes much simpler. Thisprovides a more workable platform for institutionsof various disciplines, such as contractors, govern-mental institutions, non-governmental organisa-tions and humanitarian agencies, to work togetherand produce better results.

Overal l qua l i t y o f houses and end use rsa t i s fact ion

Eventually, the satisfaction of the end users is a keyconcern. Although the affected individuals mayeventually be thankful for the resettlement of theirlivelihoods after possibly losing all their posses-sions, it must be understood that they are entitled tobe opinionated of the quality of the finished prod-uct. For this reason institutions such as FEMA, APECand UNDRO have set standards for post-disasterhousing reconstruction.

SEAW (2011) with respect to post-disasteroperations in Japan, suggests that having timely

solutions to housing will reduce the burden onsocial services, and the stress on affected individu-als by living in temporary shelters. To satisfy thisrequirement fully, the housing solutions will need tocater to most of the requirements of those individu-als, which will then reduce their grievances by hav-ing minimal defects and desires not fulfilled.

The production of a housing module isdone in a highly quality controlled environment.The quality checks inside a mass production facilitywill be more reliable compared to an on-site con-struction, especially in a post-disaster scenariowhere on-site construction will be under heavypressure for delivery.

Further, modules can be adjusted to suit theneeds of the end users, and as the construction ishighly time efficient, the parties involved can taketime to analyse the situation and to plan for thespecific requirements of the affected community.This will make sure that the final product suits themwith respect to both structural stability and liveabili-ty.

Othe r bene f i t s

Modular construction requires minimum accessroads as on-site construction will be minimal.Modular units can be shipped in or transported ontrucks and placed on site using mobile cranes. Thisis a very convenient and practical method of con-struction, especially in a disaster struck area wherevehicle access could be a key limiting factor.

Modular structures have proven to be moreenvironmentally friendly than conventional steel orconcrete buildings. Far less waste is generated bymodular construction, thereby giving it an edge inhaving a smaller impact on the environment, whichmay result in time and cost savings over reducedexpenses in dealing with waste. In further studies,Aye et al (2012) have found that more than 80% ofthe embodied energy in an original steel modularsystem can be saved by reusing the modules. It isimportant to notice the advantage provided bymodular units by its ability to be easily dismantledand relocated as and when the need arises. Thiscan provide a great deal of flexibility in a post-dis-aster housing operation.

Modules can also be easily dismantled forrelocation. If the tenants are unhappy with wherethey are located the relevant agencies can helpthem relocate with the houses they have been pro-vided with. This adds value to the operation bybeing more oriented towards the human needs assuggested through HIC-HLRN and PDHRE humanrights requirements.

6 8

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

ford

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

CONCLUSION

It is observed from the different examples fromaround the world that permanent housing can takeyears to realise after a disaster, while temporaryhousing could be provided in a matter of days.Modular construction can drastically improve thistime gap. The faster construction times, which arecharacteristic of modular construction, make thisform of construction a great solution for providingfaster permanent houses.

Factors such as scarcity of resources, defi-ciencies in transportation, funding, etc. can stillhave a detrimental effect on the efficiency of amodular construction. However such factors can beexpected in a post-disaster scenario. Modular con-struction can provide a more integrated approachwhere economies of scale that arise through massproduction will provide a valuable solution to fund-ing difficulties. As almost all the building compo-nents would be integrated into one single modulebefore it leaves the manufacturing plant, the disas-ter relief operation would depend on a single con-tractor instead of various different contractors andsubcontractors. This characteristic of modular con-struction will simplify the entire process of post-dis-aster housing.

A great advantage of using modular struc-tures as a post-disaster housing solution is thatmuch of the expertise in reconstruction is directed toone solution provider. As seen in many cases stud-ied in this paper, the expertise of appointed officersand institutions on the technologies involved is akey factor related to the speed of providing housingsolutions.

The higher quality standards that can beassured due to the modules being constructedunder a quality controlled environment such as amanufacturing plant will ensure greater satisfactionto the end users. Modules can be pre-engineeredto perform at various climatic conditions in order toprovide a better indoor climate to the dwellers.Better preparedness and having a set of modulesthat were prototyped previously with well-estab-lished production logistics, can result in even fasterdelivery of final products. Techniques such as BIMcan be used to efficiently gather and channel allsuch design requirements from a disaster struckcommunity to the designers, and modular con-struction will be highly compatible to associate suchrequirements to produce custom-designed housesin a much faster time period. This is a great way toensure that the livelihoods of the affected commu-nities are restored to their satisfaction, and toensure that their basic human rights on permanenthousing are provided as early as possible.

REFERENCES

APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) 2009, Guidelines

and Best Practices for Post-Disaster Damage and Loss

Assessment; Report from APEC Workshop on Damage

Assessment Techniques. Hong Kong, Corporate Social

Responsibility in Asia.

Arshad, S. and Athar, S. 2013, Rural Housing Reconstruction

Program Post-2005 Earthquake: Learning from the Pakistan

Experience: A Manual for Post-Disaster Housing Program

Managers. Washington D.C., World Bank.

Aye, L. et al 2012, “Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and

Energy Analysis of Prefabricated Reusable Building Modules”.

Energy and Buildings, No. 47.

FEMA. 2005, Planning for Post Disaster Recovery and

Reconstruction, Washington D.C., FEMA (Federal Emergency

Management Agency).

Florida Department of Community Affairs and Florida Division

of Emergency Management 2010, Post-Disaster

Redevelopment Planning: A Guide for Florida Communities.

Tallahassee, CSA International Inc.

HIC-HLRN and PDHRE 2005, International Human Rights

Standards on Post-Disaster Resettlement and Rehabilitation.

Geneva, HIC-HLRN (Habitat International Coalition – Housing

and Land Rights Network and New york, PDHRE (People’s

Movement for Human Rights Learning).

Lawson, R. M. et al 2012, “Application of Modular

Construction in High-Rise Buildings”. Journal of Architectural

Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2.

McIntosh, J. 2013, “The Implications of Post Disaster Recovery

for Affordable Housing” in Tiefenbacher, J. (ed.) Approaches to

Disaster Management: Examining the Implications of Hazards,

Emergencies and Disasters. Rijeka (Croatia), Intech.

Osmani, M. et al 2006, Architect and Contractor Attitudes to

Waste Minimisation. Waste and Resource Management, Vol. 2,

No. 1.

Oxfam 2003, Guidelines for Post Disaster Housing, Version 1.

Oxford, Oxfam.

Rogan, A. L. et al 2000, Value and Benefits Assessment of

Modular Construction. Berkshire (UK), Steel Construction

Institute.

Roosli, R. et al 2012, “Building and Planning of Post-Disaster

Rehabilitation and Reconstruction”. International Journal of

Academic Research, Vol. 4, No. 1.

ShelterProject.org 2003, Draft Guidelines for the Transitional

6 9

open

house

inte

rnatio

nal Vo

l.39

No.3

, S

epte

mber

2014. TI

ME-E

FFIC

IEN

T PO

ST-D

ISA

STER

HO

USI

NG

...

Thara

ka G

unaw

ard

ena, Tu

an N

go, Pr

iyan M

endis

, Lu

Aye

, R

ober

t C

raw

fordSettlement of Displaced Populations. Cambridge (UK),

University of Cambridge.

SEAW (Structural Engineers Association, Washington) 2011,

“Great East Japan (Tohoku) Earthquake and Tsunami”. The

Japan Journal, December, 2011.

Tas, N. et al 2010, “Study on Permanent Housing Production

after 1999 Earthquake in Kocaeli (Turkey)”. Disaster Prevention

and Management, Vol. 19, No. 1.

Tas, N. et al 2011, “Permanent housing production process

after 17 August 1999 Marmara Earthquake in Turkey”.

International Journal of Strategic Property Management, Vol.

15, No. 3.

UNDRO 1979, Natural Disasters and Vulnerability Analysis.

Geneva, UNDRO (United Nations Disaster Relief

Organization).

Weerakoon, D. et al 2007, Economic Challenges of Post-

Tsunami Reconstruction in Sri Lanka (No. 75, ADB Institute

Discussion Papers). Manila, Asian Development Bank.

yan, C. et al 2010, “Resourcing Challenges for Post-Disaster

Housing Reconstruction: A Comparative Analysis”. Building

Research & Information, Vol. 38, No. 3.

yan, C. et al 2011, “Identifying Factors Affecting Resource

Availability for Post-Disaster Reconstruction: A Case Study in

China”. Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 29,

No. 1.

Author(s):

Tharaka Gunawardena (corresponding author)Department of Infrastructure EngineeringThe University of MelbourneEmail: tharakag@student.unimelb.edu.au

Tuan NgoDepartment of Infrastructure EngineeringThe University of Melbourne

Priyan MendisDepartment of Infrastructure EngineeringThe University of Melbourne

Lu AyeDepartment of Infrastructure EngineeringThe University of Melbourne

Robert CrawfordFaculty of Architecture, Building and PlanningThe University of Melbourne

Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne

Author/s:

Gunawardena, T; Tuan, N; Mendis, P; Aye, L; Crawford, RH

Title:

Time-efficient post-disaster housing reconstruction with prefabricated modular structures

Date:

2014-09-01

Citation:

Gunawardena, T., Tuan, N., Mendis, P., Aye, L. & Crawford, R. H. (2014). Time-efficient

post-disaster housing reconstruction with prefabricated modular structures. Open House

International, 39 (3), pp.59-69. https://doi.org/10.1108/ohi-03-2014-b0007.

Persistent Link:

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/133381

File Description:

Published version