jan husdal nectar 2006

8/14/2019 Jan Husdal NECTAR 2006

1/11

Transport network vulnerability which terminology and metrics

should we use?

Nectar Cluster 1 Seminar

1

12 -13 May 2005 Molde, Norway

Jan HusdalMolde Research Institute


2/11


3/11

Background I RISIT (2002-2007)

The transport sector ingeneral has very limitedexperience with regard torisk based management

Cost-benefit analyses andenvironmental impactanalyses are being used, butrisk anal ses and risk

3

acceptance criteria are not.

Risk and vulnerability as aRisk and vulnerability as aconcept and as aconcept and as amanagement tool has nomanagement tool has no

marked tradition among themarked tradition among theNorwegian road authoritiesNorwegian road authoritiesor amongst the internationalor amongst the internationalroad authoritiesroad authorities

www.program.forskningsradet.no/risit/


4/11

Background II Goverment strategies

The transport sector is likely tobe increasingly affected by theconsequences of infrastructurebreakdown/disruption caused by

accidents, natural disasters,climate change and terrorist acts

Risk and vulnerability analysesRisk and vulnerability analysesshould be applied across sectorsshould be applied across sectors

4

to improve cost/benefitto improve cost/benefitevaluations of security andevaluations of security andcontingency measures, to bettercontingency measures, to betterunderstand vulnerability withinunderstand vulnerability withinand between sectors and modes,and between sectors and modes,and to improve the quality andand to improve the quality and

efficacy of current systems andefficacy of current systems andmeasures.measures.


5/11

Publications, presentations, conferences

Samferdsel (2/2004) Plitelighet og srbarhet 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

5

e a y vu nera y vs. cos s ene s

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


6/11

Problem statement Road networks are vulnerableRoad networks are vulnerableto many (external) circumstances Additional costs incur whenAdditional costs incur whenpeople, 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, nonsparse, non--congested, rural networkscongested, rural 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

6

local population and access to markets for the local businesses.

VulnerabilityVulnerabilityof a transport network The networks susceptibility to failure (disruption, degradation).

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

ReliabilityReliability= BenefitBenefit---- VulnerabilityVulnerability= CostCost

What is the (expected) vulnerability costvulnerability costof using a particular route (orlink on a route)?


7/11

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 failureThe probability and impact of failureof a given network, link or route, given external circumstances or strenuous conditions

The probability of the external circumstances occurringThe probability of the external circumstances occurring The robustness of the systemThe 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 systemThe time and cost to repair the system

7

and the system fails at its vulnerable point The costs to the general economyThe costs to the general economyof 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 projectThe contribution of a given project to improving the robustness

and hence reliability of the system The degree of risk aversionThe degree of risk aversionthat should be applied

in deciding what weight to place on the risk that has been identified (level of threat x level of vulnerability)


8/11

The cost of vulnerability

8

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

Vulnerability


9/11

Research questions Can one establish a practice-oriented methodology for

aggregating a vulnerability index for a road networkaggregating a vulnerability index for a road network, andthe costs associated with various vulnerabilities?

What is the vulnerability cost of transportvulnerability cost of transporton a particularroute or link on a route?

What is the vulnerability cost of locationvulnerability cost of locationin relation to the

9

ne g our ng ranspor ne wor

How do transport-dependent entities adapt toadapt totransporttransport--related uncertaintiesrelated 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


10/11

Bottlenecks in freight transport by road

A multi-criteria approachin assessing monetaryand non-monetaryeffects of bottlenecks

10

V = CiIiV = VulnerabilityC = Category weightI = Impact score


11/11

Thank You

11

Questions?

Source: www.avisa-hordaland.no

jan husdal nectar 2006

Documents