Jan Husdal Nectar 2006

Transport network vulnerability – which terminology and metrics should we use?

Nectar Cluster 1 Seminar

Transport Network Vulnerability 12 -13 May 2005 Molde, Norway

Jan Husdal Molde Research Institute 1

Jan Husdal
holds an MSc in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) from the University of Leicester, UK, 2000, focussing on least--cost paths and network analysis least
has been working with issues related to risk assessment, vulnerability analysis and community planning since 1989, working for several regional government agencies, before joining MFM (Molde Research Institute) in November 2005
has since 2004 served as a member of the program committee on European Policy and Research with the Association for European Transport, AET
was in 2005 appointed as member of the Transportation Economics Committee ABE20 with the Transportation Research Board, TRB 2

Background I – RISIT (2002-2007)
The transport sector in general has very limited experience with regard to risk based management
Cost-benefit analyses and environmental impact analyses are being used, but risk analyses and risk acceptance criteria are not.
Risk and vulnerability as a concept and as a management tool has no marked tradition among the Norwegian road authorities or amongst the international road authorities www.program.forskningsradet.no/risit/

3

Background II – Goverment strategies
The transport sector is likely to be increasingly affected by the consequences of infrastructure breakdown/disruption caused by accidents, natural disasters, climate change and terrorist acts
Risk and vulnerability analyses should be applied across sectors to improve cost/benefit evaluations of security and contingency measures, to better understand vulnerability within and between sectors and modes, and to improve the quality and efficacy of current systems and measures.

4

Publications, presentations, conferences
Samferdsel (2/2004)
Pålitelighet og sårbarhet – et ikke-tema i nyttekostanalyser?


INSTR 2004, 20-24 August 2004, Christchurch NZ
Reliability and vulnerability vs. costs and benefits
Reviewed abstract
Conference proceedings


ETC 2004, 4-6 October 2004, Strasbourg, France
Reliability/vulnerability vs. costs/benefits
Reviewed abstract
Conference Proceedings


TRB 2005, 9-13 January 2005, Washington DC, USA
The vulnerability of road networks in a cost-benefit perspective
Full paper peer-reviewed by 5 reviewers
Conference proceedings

5

Problem statement
Road networks are vulnerable to many (external) circumstances
Additional costs incur when people, travellers or goods do not reach their destination in space or time as intended.






Delays Diversions/detours Late delivery, non-delivery, early delivery Just-in-time Perishable goods


This is particularly an issue in sparse, nonnon-congested, rural networks, networks
vulnerability is here more an issue than reliability (travel time variability)
because the network is so essential for access to community services for the local population and access to markets for the local businesses.


Vulnerability of a transport network
The network’s susceptibility to failure (disruption, degradation).


Reliability of a transport network
The probability that the network functions, or rather: does not fail to function.


Reliability = Benefit ---- Vulnerability = Cost
What is the (expected) vulnerability cost of using a particular route (or link on a route)? 6

Project evaluation and Vulnerability


Some of the elements that project evaluation procedures should take explicitly into account in order to incorporate considerations of vulnerability are the following:


The probability and impact of failure of a given network, link or route,
given external circumstances or strenuous conditions


The probability of the external circumstances occurring
The robustness of the system
the probability that the system will continue to function
even if a threat eventuates at a vulnerable point


The time and cost to repair the system
if the threat occurs
and the system fails at its vulnerable point


The costs to the general economy of such a failure
goods and passengers not getting to their destinations, or getting there late,
transportation carriers being forced to use expensive detours, etc.


The contribution of a given project
to improving the robustness
and hence reliability of the system


The degree of risk aversion that should be applied
in deciding what weight to place on the risk that has been identified
(level of threat x level of vulnerability) 7

The cost of vulnerability

Vulnerability The costs of vulnerability versus reliability. A - current state, B – high investment (e.g. new road), C – low investment (e.g. upgrading existing road), D - optimum

8

Research questions
Can one establish a practice-oriented methodology for aggregating a vulnerability index for a road network, network and the costs associated with various vulnerabilities?
What is the vulnerability cost of transport on a particular route or link on a route?
What is the vulnerability cost of location in relation to the neighbouring transport network?


How do transport-dependent entities adapt to transport--related uncertainties transport uncertainties?
Suppliers – producers – customers
JIT, inventory, lead times, scheduling, routing etc.
Surveys and in-depth interviews to establish criteria values and weights
Case studies of selected firms 9

Bottlenecks in freight transport by road
A multi-criteria approach in assessing monetary and non-monetary effects of bottlenecks

V = Σ CiIi

V = Vulnerability C = Category weight I = Impact score

10

Thank You…

Questions?

Source: www.avisa-hordaland.no 11