Structuring a Definition of Resilience for the Freight Transportation System

quake may have a more meaningful measure of severity than the earthquake's magnitude because intensity refers to the effects experienced at that place. The Haitian earthquake was assigned an MMI value of 9, indicating severe damage to poorly built structures (fallen chimneys, smokestacks, columns, monuments, and walls; heavy furniture overturned), as well as considerable damage in specially and well-designed frame structures, which were thrown out of plumb. Substantial buildings also incurred severe damage with partial collapses and buildings shifted off their foundations (2).Almost 1 month later, a magnitude 8.8 earthquake rocked the Chilean coast; however, it was assigned an MMI value of 8. Despite the significantly stronger event in Chile, the MMI value was lower because damage was less significant. Whereas Haiti took months to recover, Chile recovered within weeks. The key difference between these two examples is resilience.Resiliency, if properly understood and applied, can preclude many of the devastating effects of disasters. Resilient transportation systems may reduce the probability of failure within the system and reduce the consequences of any failure that occurs, thus improving recovery time. Understanding the resiliency of a transportation system after a disaster has occurred does little to mitigate the effects of the event. Thus, this paper expands on the conceptual framework developed by Heaslip et al. to assess the network resiliency of a system before a destabilizing event (3). This process identifies weaknesses within the network and provides decision makers with a flexible and robust method for quantifying resiliency. The information can be used to properly prioritize transportation investments to enhance network resiliency. DEFINING RESILIENCEThe concept of resilience is broadly applied in many fields of study (e.g., engineering, psychology, sociology, economics). Similar concepts are flexibility, redundancy, reliability, elasticity, and risk management. In economics, the term "resilience" refers to the ability to recover quickly from a shock (shock counteraction), to withstand the effect of a shock (shock absorption), and to avoid the shock (vulnerability) (4). In social science, resilience is the capacity of a system that has been exposed to hazards to adapt by resisting or changing, so that it can reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure (5). In earthquake engineering, researchers define seismic resilience as the ability of social units (e.g., organizations, communities) to mitigate hazards, contain the effects of disasters, and carry out recovery activities in ways that minimize social disruption and reduce the effects of future earthquakes (6). Community seismic resilience is the capacity to absorb stress, manage it, and recover from it (7). More generally, resilience is the capacity to absorb shocks gracefully (8).The concept of resilience has been studied in the field of transportation engineering as well. Conceptual frameworks have been created Evaluation of...

show abstract

“…• A system's ability to absorb the consequences of disruptions to reduce the impact of disruptions and maintain freight mobility (11).…”

Section: Evaluation Of Resiliency Of Transportation Network After DImentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Resiliency of Transportation Networks after Disasters

Freckleton

Heaslip

Louisell

et al. 2012

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reed et al (67) present resilience scoring metrics and build on the work of Haimes (58) in using input-output models to measure the resilience of interconnected systems. These ideas have been prevalent in the civil engineering literature, particularly in assessing the resilience of freight transportation (68,69) and its dependence on maritime systems, (70,71) with emphasis to evaluate the resilience of transportation networks after a disaster. (72,73) Using ideas from control theory, Vugrin et al (74) characterize resilience in terms of the deviation (both magnitude and duration) from "normal" operation that follows a disruptive event; in this context, a system is more resilient if it experiences smaller deviations.…”

Section: Notions Of Resiliencementioning

confidence: 99%

Operational Models of Infrastructure Resilience

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a definition of infrastructure resilience that is tied to the operation (or function) of an infrastructure as a system of interacting components and that can be objectively evaluated using quantitative models. Specifically, for any particular system, we use quantitative models of system operation to represent the decisions of an infrastructure operator who guides the behavior of the system as a whole, even in the presence of disruptions. Modeling infrastructure operation in this way makes it possible to systematically evaluate the consequences associated with the loss of infrastructure components, and leads to a precise notion of "operational resilience" that facilitates model verification, validation, and reproducible results. Using a simple example of a notional infrastructure, we demonstrate how to use these models for (1) assessing the operational resilience of an infrastructure system, (2) identifying critical vulnerabilities that threaten its continued function, and (3) advising policymakers on investments to improve resilience.

show abstract

“…The ability for the system to absorb the consequences of disruptions to reduce the impacts of disruptions and maintain freight mobility (Ta et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systemic Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of Transportation Systems Under Natural Hazards Towards More Resilient and Robust Infrastructures

Pitilakis

Argyroudis

Kakderi

et al. 2016

Transportation Research Procedia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transportation infrastructures are complex systems of various connected components like bridges, roads, tunnels, embankments, retaining walls in case of a highway system or wharfs, cranes, buildings, utility systems in case of port facilities. Due to their spatial extent, they are exposed to variable natural hazards such as earthquakes, tsunami or landslides. Experience from past disastrous events shows that transportation infrastructures are quite vulnerable due to the lack of redundancy, the lengthy repair time, the rerouting difficulties or the cascading failures and interdependencies. Their damage could be greatly disruptive in terms of safety of life, business disruption, access to emergency services and key lifelines utilities, rescue operations and socioeconomic impacts. Therefore, in terms of resilience it is important to recognize and quantify the risks and global losses associated to damages of transportation systems and to establish efficient risk mitigation strategies. These include, among others, enhancement of emergency preparedness, strengthening of existing structures and improvement of the recovery planning. Herein an integrated framework for the probabilistic systemic vulnerability and risk assessment of transportation and utility networks is presented, based on the achievements of the recently completed EC project SYNER-G (www.syner-g.eu) and the ongoing EC project STREST (www.strest-eu.org). The infrastructure is modeled according to a detailed taxonomy. The framework encompasses in an integrated fashion all aspects in the chain, from regional hazard to fragility assessment of components to the socio-economic impacts of a natural disaster, accounting for relevant uncertainties within an efficient quantitative simulation scheme, and modeling interactions between multiple component systems in the taxonomy. Selected Performance Indicators (PIs) are calculated for each network based on the estimated damages and functionality losses of the different components under the given hazards. The methodology and tools are demonstrated through case studies in the road network and the harbor of Thessaloniki city, Greece, under seismic hazard and associated geotechnical hazards (i.e. soil liquefaction). The applications include assessments of systems' performance considering the spatial seismic hazard with correlation of ground motion intensities, the vulnerability of the network components, and the effect of interactions within the system, as well as, between components of different systems. In particular, road disruptions can be caused due to direct damage of road segments and bridges, as well as building and overpass collapses. Harbor operations can be disturbed due to failures of waterfront structures and cargo handling equipment, as well as disruptions to the electric power supply and building collapses. The systemic risk for the road network and harbor is calculated, specifically focusing on the short-term impact of seismic events (just after the earthquake) and the risk curves (i.e. mean annual rates o...

show abstract

Structuring a Definition of Resilience for the Freight Transportation System

Cited by 83 publications

References 9 publications

Evaluation of Resiliency of Transportation Networks after Disasters

Evaluation of Resiliency of Transportation Networks after Disasters

Operational Models of Infrastructure Resilience

Systemic Vulnerability and Risk Assessment of Transportation Systems Under Natural Hazards Towards More Resilient and Robust Infrastructures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About