Methods to Include the Impact of Factors in Postearthquake Cost Estimations for Earthquake Damage Repair Work
Abstract
Earthquakes are catastrophic natural disasters, and the built environment requires a quick recovery after such events. Estimating the loss from an earthquake can be complex as unique factors, in addition to conventional repair work, that need to be considered during the postperiod stage. Previous research has been able to identify 11 factors that impact the postearthquake cost estimation for the earthquake damage repair work (CEEDRW) process. Current loss estimation methods such as PACT, SLAT, and SP3 do not incorporate the impact of all these factors. This paper identifies the factors that impact different stages of traditional CEEDRW: precontract estimates, estimates during repair work, and cost calculations after construction. Discussion around methods to adopt these modeling factors into CEEDRW is also presented. A two-stage data collection method was adopted for this paper. Data were collected through semistructured interviews using 19 participants and a questionnaire survey using 92 participants who have experience in the CEEDRW process. The interview data analysis emphasized the usage of 11 factors at the three stages of estimation. Furthermore, survey results identified the most suitable methods of incorporating each factor in CEEDRW. Existing estimation tools used for CEEDRW do not consider a number of factors. This paper suggests the most suitable methods of considering these into an estimation tool that aims to enhance the accuracy and reliability of the CEEDRW process. The methods identified in this paper can be used in developing more reliable future cost estimation models used to determine postearthquake damage repair work. The data were collected from professionals who are experienced in housing repair work in New Zealand. The results vary for other types of geographic regions and construction methods.
Practical Applications
Currently used postearthquake cost estimation processes for earthquake damage repair work have a lot of drawbacks. To achieve the final aim of developing a standard postearthquake cost estimation model for earthquake damage repair work that is more accurate and faster than current ones, this research achieved one of the objectives of identifying methods that can be used to mitigate problems of the current cost estimation process. The research identifies methods that can be used to include factors that were not fully considered in current postearthquake cost estimation processes. The results of the research will help with increasing the accuracy of the upgraded model. The next step in this process is the develop the upgraded standard postearthquake cost estimation model for earthquake damage repair work. Even with the current findings, cost estimators, builders, and insurance agencies can improve their cost estimation process by including the impact of the factors through the suggested methods. Governments can implement changes to standard construction contracts and policies so that the construction industry can positively manage the cost-varying dynamics of earthquake damage repair work.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are proprietary or confidential in nature and may only be provided with restrictions.
•
Questionnaire survey data. (Restrictions: individual data inputs have restrictions for sharing due to confidentiality. However, anonymized summarized data can be provided.)
Acknowledgments
Special acknowledgments go to Janitha Jayadeva, Dawn Gillard, James Dawson, Nishadi Sooriyamudalige, Ester Aigwi, Chinthaka Atapattu, and Monty Sutrisna for supporting with their knowledge in data collection and write-up.
Author contributions: Conceptualization—Ravindu Kahandawa and Niluka Domingo; methodology—Ravindu Kahandawa and Niluka Domingo; validation—Ravindu Kahandawa and Niluka Domingo; formal analysis—Ravindu Kahandawa; investigation—Ravindu Kahandawa and Niluka Domingo; resources—Ravindu Kahandawa, Niluka Domingo, Gregory Chawynski, and S. R. Uma; data curation—Ravindu Kahandawa; writing—original draft preparation, Ravindu Kahandawa; writing—review and editing, Ravindu Kahandawa, Niluka Domingo, Gregory Chawynski, and S. R. Uma; visualization—Ravindu Kahandawa, Niluka Domingo, and Gregory Chawynski; supervision—Niluka Domingo, Gregory Chawynski, and S. R. Uma; and project administration—Ravindu Kahandawa, Niluka Domingo, Gregory Chawynski, and S. R. Uma. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
References
Ahmad, K. H. 2011. Construction economics. 2nd ed. Petaling Jaya, Malaysia: Pearson.
Alshenqeeti, H. 2014. “Interviewing as a data collection method: A critical review.” English Ling. Res. 3 (1): 39–45. https://doi.org/10.5430/elr.v3n1p39.
Applied Technology Council. 2012. Seismic performance assessment of buildings: Vol. 1. Methodology. Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council.
Applied Technology Council. 2018. Seismic performance assessment of buildings: Vol. 2. Implementation guide. 2nd ed. Redwood City, CA: Applied Technology Council.
Ashworth, A., and S. Perera. 2015. Cost studies of buildings. 6th ed. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Ben-Arieh, D., and L. Qian. 2003. “Activity-based cost management for design and development stage.” Int. J. Prod. Econ. 83 (2): 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(02)00323-7.
Bradley, B. A. 2009. User manual for SLAT: Seismic loss assessment tool version 1. 14. Christchurch, New Zealand: Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Canterbury.
Bryman, A., and E. Bell. 2011. Business research methods. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Cartlidge, D. P. 2017. Quantity surveyor’s pocket book. 3rd ed. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
Department of Homeland Security and FEMA. 2003. “HAZUS-MH 2.1: Technical manual.” Accessed June, 2 2017. https://www.fema.gov/hazus-mh-user-technical-manuals.
Easterby-Smith, M., R. Thorpe, and P. R. Jackson. 2015. Management and business research. 5th ed. London: SAGE.
Frimpong, Y., J. Oluwoye, and L. Crawford. 2003. “Causes of delay and cost overruns in construction of groundwater projects in a developing countries; Ghana as a case study.” Int. J. Project Manage. 21 (5): 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(02)00055-8.
Guest, G., A. Bunce, and L. Johnson. 2006. “How many interviews are enough?” Field Methods 18 (1): 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903.
Haselton Baker Risk Group. 2020. Seismic risk assessment report from SP3-risk model software v1.2.0. Chico, CA: Haselton Baker Risk Group.
Haselton, C. B., and J. Baker. 2019. The FEMA P-58 methodology and the seismic performance prediction program (SP3). Chico, CA: Haselton Baker Risk Group.
High Court of New Zealand. 2011. “Tower Insurance Ltd v earthquake commission (CIV-2011-485–1116).” Accessed September 2, 2011. https://www.justice.govt.nz/jdo_documents/workspace___SpacesStore_870c5917_4683_4ab0_8c22_af63915df211.pdf.
Holland, N. L., and D. Hobson Jr. 1999. “Indirect cost categorization and allocation by construction contractors.” J. Archit. Eng. 5 (2): 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0431(1999)5:2(49).
Horspool, N. A., A. B. King, S. L. Lin, and S. R. Uma. 2016. “Damage and losses to residential buildings during the Canterbury earthquake sequence.” In Proc., of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 2016 Conf. Christchurch, New Zealand: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering.
Hueber, C., K. Horejsi, and R. Schledjewski. 2016. “Review of cost estimation: Methods and models for aerospace composite manufacturing.” Adv. Manuf.: Polym. Compos. Sci. 2 (1): 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/20550340.2016.1154642.
Insurance Council of New Zealand. 2019. “Canterbury earthquakes.” Accessed October 27, 2019. https://www.icnz.org.nz/natural-disasters/canterbury-earthquakes/.
Isaac, S., and W. B. Michael. 1981. Handbook in research and evaluation: A collection of principles, methods, and strategies useful in the planning, design, and evaluation of studies in education and the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. San Diego: EDITS Publishers.
Ji, S.-H., J. Ahn, H.-S. Lee, and K. Han. 2019. “Cost estimation model using modified parameters for construction projects.” Adv. Civ. Eng. 2019 (Jul): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8290935.
Kahandawa, R., N. Domingo, G. Chawynski, and S. R. Uma. 2020. “Factors impacting post-earthquake damage repair cost estimations.” Int. J. Disaster Resilience Built Environ. 12 (1): 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-10-2019-0071.
Kahandawa, R., N. D. Domingo, G. Chawynski, and S. R. Uma. 2019. “Factors affecting post-earthquake damage repair cost estimations.” Accessed October 16, 2019. https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10092/17186/POSTER-Kahandawa_InvestigationintotheFactorsAffectingCostsofEarthquakeDamageRepairWork.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Kahandawa, R., N. D. Domingo, K. S. Park, and S. R. Uma. 2018. “Earthquake damage estimation systems: Literature review.” Procedia Eng. 212 (Jan): 622–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.080.
Kim, S.-Y., K. N. Tuan, J. D. Lee, H. Pham, and V. T. Luu. 2018. “Cost overrun factor analysis for hospital projects in Vietnam.” KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 22 (1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-017-0947-5.
Kirkham, R. 2015. Ferry and Brandon’s cost planning of buildings. 9th ed. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
Lee, G., G. Lee, S. Chi, and S. Oh. 2023. “Automatic classification of construction work codes in bill of quantities of national roadway based on text analysis.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 149 (2): 04022163. https://doi.org/10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-12730.
Memon, A. H., I. A. Rahman, M. R. Abdullah, and A. A. A. Azis. 2010. “Factors affecting construction cost in Mara Large construction project: Perspective of project management consultant.” Int. J. Sustainable Constr. Eng. Technol. 1 (2): 41–54.
Merriam, S. B., and E. J. Tisdell. 2016. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. 4th ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Molina, S., D. H. Lang, and C. D. Lindholm. 2010. “SELENA—An open-source tool for seismic risk and loss assessment using a logic tree computation procedure.” Comput. Geosci. 36 (3): 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2009.07.006.
Munich Re Group. 2019. Earthquake/tsunami events worldwide 1980–2018. München, Germany: Munich Re Group.
Ojha, A., S. Long, T. Shoberg, and S. Corns. 2021. “Bottom-up resource and cost estimation for restoration of supply chain interdependent critical infrastructure.” Eng. Manage. J. 33 (4): 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2020.1800387.
Olawale, Y. A., and M. Sun. 2010. “Cost and time control of construction projects: Inhibiting factors and mitigating measures in practice.” Construct. Manage. Econ. 28 (5): 509–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446191003674519.
Rahman, I. A., A. H. Memon, A. T. A. Karim, and A. Tarmizi. 2013. “Significant factors causing cost overruns in large construction projects in Malaysia.” J. Appl. Sci. 13 (2): 286–293. https://doi.org/10.3923/jas.2013.286.293.
Saunders, M., P. Lewis, and A. Thornhill. 2019. Research methods for business students. 8th ed. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
Tah, J. H. M., A. Thorpe, and R. McCaffer. 1994. “A survey of indirect cost estimating in practice.” Construct. Manage. Econ. 12 (1): 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446199400000004.
Tayefeh Hashemi, S., O. M. Ebadati, and H. Kaur. 2020. “Cost estimation and prediction in construction projects: A systematic review on machine learning techniques.” SN Appl. Sci. 2 (10): 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-03497-1.
Towey, D. 2017. Construction quantity surveying: A practical guide for the contractor’s QS. 1st ed. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
Yu, W.-D. 2006. “PIREM: A new model for conceptual cost estimation.” Construct. Manage. Econ. 24 (3): 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190500183735.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Natural Hazards Review
Volume 25 • Issue 1 • February 2024
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 17, 2022
Accepted: Aug 11, 2023
Published online: Oct 16, 2023
Published in print: Feb 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Mar 16, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Benefit cost ratios
- Buildings
- Business management
- Construction costs
- Construction engineering
- Construction management
- Construction methods
- Data collection
- Disaster risk management
- Disasters and hazards
- Earthquakes
- Engineering fundamentals
- Financial management
- Geohazards
- Geotechnical engineering
- Methodology (by type)
- Natural disasters
- Practice and Profession
- Project management
- Research methods (by type)
- Structural engineering
- Structures (by type)
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.