Purpose Higher education institutions (HEIs) function as complex-built environments that support critical societal services, including education, research and health. Disruptions caused by disasters can compromise both physical infrastructure and institutional continuity. This study aims to examine how Turkish HEIs integrate disaster resilience and continuity considerations into their strategic and emergency planning within the national integrated disaster management system. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative research design was used, combining document analysis and semi-structured interviews. Strategic plans and disaster and emergency plans of 87 HEIs were systematically reviewed using thematic analysis. In addition, interviews were conducted with representatives of disaster research centers at seven universities. The analysis focused on disaster risk reduction, operational and academic continuity and alignment with national disaster management frameworks. Findings The findings reveal substantial gaps in the integration of disaster resilience and continuity planning within HEIs. Most institutions rely on generic emergency procedures, with limited consideration of institutional-specific risks, operational continuity or recovery of core services. Only one HEI explicitly integrates the national integrated disaster management system into its strategic planning. Disaster response teams, continuity planning and built-environment-related preparedness measures remain underdeveloped across the sector. Practical implications This study highlights the need for institution-specific, risk-informed disaster and continuity frameworks to enhance the resilience of higher education as critical infrastructure. Originality/value This study provides the first comprehensive, system-level analysis of disaster resilience and continuity planning in Turkish HEIs, conceptualizing universities as critical built environments embedded within a national disaster governance framework. The findings contribute to disaster resilience scholarship by linking institutional governance, continuity planning and built environment resilience within a previously unexamined national context.
Onan et al. (Wed,) studied this question.