An Open Systems Framework

for

Interdependency Planning & Management

Presented by Dr Ges Rosenberg,

University of Bristol Systems Centre

Governance and Regulation Session held on Tuesday 2nd December 2014

Research Collaboration

Bartlett School of Planning

OMEGA Centre for Mega Projects in Transport & Development

Infrastructure comprises an evolving continuum of interconnected

systems which is required to meet changing needs in both time and

space, and therefore infrastructure delivery projects cannot be conceived in

isolation from existing legacy infrastructure, from future known

infrastructure needs, or from the developing culture and socio-economic

policies within which they exist.

Interdependence can be a

valuable asset that should be

continually appraised and developed

throughout the planning, appraisal,

design and operational life of the

related infrastructure. For example,

when interdependence is considered

holistically then concepts such as

infrastructure corridors can be

seen to be an economically attractive

proposition.

That effective, efficient governance and ‘stewardship’ of infrastructure

requires a shift away from an individual asset management perspective,

and requires a wide range of institutions and enterprises to collaborate in developing a framework of efficient policies, plans, processes and

institutions.

Interdependency Panning &

Management Framework

Framework Requirements

• Promote and support collaboration on infrastructure

• Identify opportunities to create enhanced value: risk

sharing and social, economic and environmental

opportunity

• Innovation: broad identification and assessment of

interdependencies at inception of the project

• Rapid and early conceptual modelling supporting

cross-sector, interdisciplinary creation of options

Framework Principles

• Continuum of Open Systems:

• ‘System of Systems’

• Manage complexity:

• ‘Soft’, complex context: social, economic, regulatory,

environmental and policy (PESTLE)

• Explore Hard Infrastructure System Boundary:

• Engage stakeholders in search for innovative options

(co-benefits)

• Stewardship & Governance

• Diverse ownership/investment

• Legacy & new infrastructure

Integrated System Design

ProvidePast FutureInnovate

Legacy Infrastructure

Replace, Reuse, Recycle, Modify,

DisposeCurrent Project

Evidence HindsightPredictionStatisticsLiteratureCase Studies Models

Evidence Foresight

VisionValues

OpportunitiesRisks

ScenariosModels

TIME

Process

Soft People & Purpose

HardProducts & Function

Performance

Past Needs &Legacy Assets

Future Needs &Future Assets

Rationale

Objectives

Appraisal

Monitoring

Evaluation

Feedback

Implementation

Infrastructure Example

Rinaldi, S. M., Peerenboom, J. P., & Kelly, T. K.

(2001). Identifying, understanding, and analyzing

critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE

Control Systems Magazine, 21(6), 11–25.

doi:10.1109/37.969131

Little, R. G. (2003). Toward more robust

infrastructure: observations on improving the

resilience and reliability of critical systems. 36th

Annual Hawaii International Conference on System

Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the (p. 9 pp.).

IEEE. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2003.1173880

Oil

Transport

Water

Electric

Power

Natural Gas

Telecoms

Fuels &

Lubricants

Fuel for

Generators &

Lubricants

Fuels &

Lubricants

Fuel for

Generators

Fuel Transport

& Shipping Shipping Shipping

Water for Cooling

& Emissions

Reduction

Water for

Production,

Cooling &

Emissions

Reduction

Water for

Cooling

Power for

Compressors,

Storage and

Control Systems

Power for

Switches

Heat

Communications Communications Communications Communications Communications

Fuel for

Generators

Power for

Pumping

Stations, Storage

& Control

Systems

Power for

Signalling &

Switches

Power for Pump

and Lift Stations

& Control

Systems

Water for

Production,

Cooling &

Emissions

Reduction

Fuel Transport

& Shipping

Wider

Environment

(Political,

social, natural,

legal etc.)

EtF Timeline Sectors E

nerg

y Electricity

Renewables

Heat

Fuels

ICT

Broadband

Mobile

GNSS

Tra

ns

po

rt

Wate

r

Waste

Em

issio

ns

Road

Rail

Ports

Air

Landfill Recycling

Disposal

Legislation

Environmental

Flooding

Water Use

P: Energy sector provides necessary electricity for operating and cooling

ICT sector equipment (e.g. Server Farms)

P: (1) Energy sector provides necessary fuel (hydrocarbons) and lubricants

to Transport sector; (2) Energy sector provides necessary electricity for

electrified rail and Electric Vehicles in the Transport sector

P: (1) Energy sector is a source of general waste transferred into Waste

sector; (2) Energy sector is a source of Nuclear Waste

P: (1) Energy sector activities (e.g. Shale Gas) can transfer pollutants which

contaminate ground water; (2) Energy sector provides necessary electricity

to Water sector for pumping etc.; (3) Energy sector requires Water for

cooling plant

D: Transport Corridor

G: Co-location. Energy sector utilities and Transport sector roads share

physical space

O:(1) Energy and ICT sectors can collaborate to create energy efficient

equipment; (2) Energy and ICT sectors collaborate on sharing data

(hindered by ownership issues)

O: Energy sector requires payment from Water sector for electricity

provided to power pumps

P: ICT sector provides necessary resources to Energy sector P: ICT components in space can become or produce space Waste P: ICT sector requires protection from flooding provided by Water sector

D: ICT sector provides resources for Smart Grid, Smart Metering, Demand

Management, Control and Billing to Energy sector

D: (1) ICT sector can potentially provide digital capability to reduce need

for physical Transport; (2) ICT sector provides resources and capability for

Transport sector activities: (a) Congestion charging (b) Boris bikes (c.)

Multimodal journey management (d) Global positioning (e) Comms (f)

Tracking (g) Stock control (h) Road use charging

D: ICT sector provides the capability for Waste and recycling 'tagging'

D: (1) ICT provides the capability for Smart Metering and management

of/within Water sector; (2) ICT provides the capability for digital control

of/within Water sector

G: Price control?????????

G: (1) Some ICT Plants and Services are geographically linked to the

Transport network; (2) Co-location of some ICT physical assets (e.g.

telecoms cables) and some Transport assets (e.g. roads)

O: (1) ICT sector provides necessary control and communications systems

to Energy sector during set-up; (2) ICT sector and Energy sector can

collaborate to reduce ICT energy footprint; (3) ICT and Energy sectors

collaborate on sharing data.

O: (1) ICT sector provides data management capability to Transport sector;

(2) ICT sector and Transport sector collaborate on sharing data. (3) ICT

sector provides capability for Transport sector to perform Logistics Route

Planning; (4) ICT sector provides capability for general operational usage

within Transport sector

O: ICT sector and Waste sector collaborate on sharing data O: ICT sector and Water sector collaborate in sharing data

P: (1) Transport sector provides the capability to move Shale Gas; (2)

Transport sector provides the capability to move fuel to power stations; (3)

Transport sector could transfer excess heat from vehicle tunnels into

Energy sector

P: (1) Capacity Issues????; (2) Transport sector provides capability for JIT

delivery for ICT sector

P: (1) Resource efficient raw mat. use; (2) Transport sector provides the

necessary capability to move Waste; (3) Transport sector creates Battery

Waste which requires disposal

P: (1) Transport sector can potentially provide (a) an obstruction to Water

or (b) facilitate its transfer; (2) Permeability of materials can facilitate

flooding

D: Transport and Energy sectors share intelligence information D: Transport sector relies on ICT sector for Road use charging capability.

G: Co-location of Transport and Energy assets

G: Co-location of Transport and Water assets to provide utility corridor

O: (1) Journey times. Freight; (2) Requires network for Electric Vehicle

charging; (3) Sector policies must be aligned to achieve goals (i.e. uptake

of Evs and reduction in domestic energy use)

O: Transport and Waste sectors can collaborate to change behaviours on

emissions (Nudge, wink, hug etc.)

O: Transport and Water sectors can collaborate on flood management

planning rules

P: (1) Waste and by-products can potentially provide a resource for the

Energy sector including processes such as Anaerobic digestion; (2) Waste

can potentially provide a source of rare Earth metals needed by the Energy

sector; (3) Security of supply. Re-use rather than source <<???; (4) Benefit

from waste usage and disposal. Truck ???erents increases<<???

P: Waste sector requires Transport sector for (1) Movement of hazardous

waste; (2) Movement of general waste; (3) Movement of specific materials

that cannot be disposed locally (e.g. Japanese knotweed)

P: (1) Waste sector can potentially produce contaminated water which is

transferred to the Water sector; (2) Waste in landfill can potentially cause

more Water runoff

G: Short circuitsG: Co-location of Waste facilities and Water resources can potentially

result in ground water contamination

O: Waste disposal plans may need to be in place before new power

stations are approved (especially Nuclear)

O: Separation of Waste at source and separation of Waste at a dedicated

facilitate have different transport needs (and affect Efficiency versus

Quality)

P: (1) Water provides a potential means to generate electricity; (2) Water

provides a necessary means of cooling Energy plant; (3) Water provides a

potential means of Energy storage; (3) Bulk Water transfer<<<???

P: Water sector provides flood protection for Transport sector assets

D: Water sector relies on ICT Sector for Smart Meters and Demand

Management

G: (1) Co-location of Transport assets and Water sources increase the risk

of flooding (2) Water utilities disrupt Transport network by digging up

roads (3) Water sector utilities can degrade road system due to sub-

standard re-instalment

O: Water sector provides payment to Energy sector for PumpingO: Water sector collaborates with ICT sector for real time data exploitation

to maximise efficiency, energy use and resilience

Energy

ICT

Transport

Waste

Water

Workshop

Identification &

Classification of

Interdependencies

P: Water required for cooling plant within the Energy sector

P: Energy sector activities (e.g. Shale Gas and other 3rd parties)

transfer pollutants which contaminate ground water

P: Energy sector transfers electricity to Water sector for

pumping

D: Transport Corridor

O: Energy sector requires payent from Water sector for

electricity provided to power pumps

P: Water provides a means of Energy storage

P: Water transfer (bulk) [-ve]. Flooding investment [+ve]

P: (1) Water provides a means to generate electricity (2) Water

provides a means of cooling Energy plant (3) Water provides a

means of Energy strorage

O: Water sector provides payment to Energy sector for Pumping

Water

Energy

Energy-Water Sector Interdependencies

High Speed 2, Phase 2

“The aim of the HS2 project is to

deliver hugely enhanced rail

capacity and connectivity between

Britain’s major conurbations.”

“The evidence base also indicates

that the enhanced capacity and

connectivity provided by HS2 would

be likely to facilitate and catalyse

regional and local economic

development.”

From: High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s

Future – Decisions and Next Steps

January 2012

HS2 – Water Sector Opportunities

1 2 3 4 5

A Climate Change

May result in increased

rainfall in North &

decreased rainfall in

South

May result in increased

rainfall in North &

decreased rainfall in

South

B Flood Protection Affects the resilience of

the railway

C Intra-Region Transfer

D Bulk Transfer

E

HS2 embankments

provide opportunity for

flood detention storage

Provides potential route

(for 50-100cm pipes)

for Strengthening inter-

company connections.

Whole route unlikely to

be optimal solution.

Provides potential route

(for 2m diameter

transfer pipes),

Although strategic need

is uncertain & whole

route unlikely to be

optimal solution

HS2

HS2 Results • Interdependencies supported:

• Inter-regional (supply zone/catchment-level)

water transfer

• Local energy networks

• Enhancing IT infrastructure capacity

• Flood protection opportunities

• Implement through:

• Passive provision at consultation and in

Hybrid Bill

Some Conclusions from Whole Study

• Project sponsors or owners:

• Identify interdependencies and engage

stakeholder at the inception;

• Further opportunities during design and during

implementation.

• Benefits of an open systems approach:

• Creativity from broad cross-sector participation

• Holistic and ‘open systems’ possible because

matrices are not constrained

• Matrix-based layout supports structured and

systematic search for interdependencies

Some Conclusions from Whole Study

• Interdependency planning to identify potential

synergies

• Opportunities to enhance project through co-benefits

as well as manage adverse interdependencies

• Recognise and meet relevant policy goals

• Transformative nature of mega-projects means:

• Value in flexibility & provisioning when future

uncertain

• Trade-offs and balanced judgments

Recommendations

• That a stewardship function is established by Government

with the purpose of overseeing the integration of

infrastructure planning, delivery and operation.

• That an open systems approach be used to underpin the

Green Book Interdependency Planning and Management

Process.

• That there will be a need to embed learning and maturity

modelling in order to inform the development of policy and

practice.

• That business models and practices are needed which

seek to promote openness and collaboration in the creation

and operation of infrastructure.

References 1. Rosenberg, G; Carhart, N; Edkins, AJ; Ward, J; (2014) Development of a Proposed Interdependency Planning

and Management Framework. International Centre for Infrastructure Futures: London, UK.

http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455020

2. Carhart, N; (2014) Identification of High-level Infrastructure Interdependencies for the Lower Thames Crossing.

International Centre for Infrastructure Futures: London, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455371

3. Rosenberg, G; Carhart, N; (2014) Review of Potential Infrastructure Interdependencies in Support of Proposed

Route HS2 Phase 2 Consultation. International Centre for Infrastructure Futures: London, UK.

http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455383

4. Ward, EJ; (2014) Phase 2 Desk Study Report of Northern Line Extension. International Centre for Infrastructure

Futures: London, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.14324/20141455361

5. Carhart, N. and Rosenberg, G. Towards a Common Language of Infrastructure Interdependency. Presented at

the International Symposium for Next Generation Infrastructure, IIASA Vienna, October 2014.

6. Rosenberg, G. & Carhart, N. (2014). A Systems-based Approach to Creating Value from Infrastructure

Interdependencies. In: Campbell P. and Perez P. (Eds), Proceedings of the International Symposium of Next

Generation Infrastructure, 1-4 October 2013, SMART Infrastructure Facility, University of Wollongong, Australia.

http://dx.doi.org/10.14453/isngi2013.proc.39