IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v51y2024i6d10.1007_s11116-023-10396-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new risk-based measure of link criticality for flood risk planning

Author

Listed:
  • James L. Sullivan

    (University of Vermont (Transportation Research Center))

  • Karen Sentoff

    (VHB, Inc. (Transportation Planning) South Burlington)

  • Joseph Segale

    (Vermont Agency of Transportation (Policy, Planning, and Research Bureau) Montpelier)

  • Norman L. Marshall

    (Smart Mobility, Inc. Thetford Center)

  • Evan Fitzgerald

    (Fitzgerald Environmental Associates, LLC Colchester)

  • Roy Schiff

    (Principal Water Resources Scientist and Engineer, SLR International Corporation (Water Resource Engineering))

Abstract

The importance of a reliable transportation system is often taken for granted but its value becomes undeniable when the system is severely disrupted with little warning, the area of impact is extensive, and the amount of time required to restore system connectivity is prolonged. For many states, the largest single cost of flood damage comes from damage to transportation infrastructure and the ensuing disruption of personal, commercial, and emergency-response travel. The goal of transportation risk planning at the state or provincial level is to consider the risks imposed by the vulnerability of network elements to strengthen the system’s ability to withstand a disruptive impact. Although separate measures of vulnerability and criticality are useful, a true risk-based measure would use the vulnerability of links in the network to calculate criticality, so links that are unlikely to be disrupted by a given hazard are left intact in the calculations. This paper details the development and application of the Network Criticality Index (NCI), a new link-specific, risk-based performance measure that uses flood-risk vulnerability scores and a Monte Carlo simulation process for simulating disruptive impacts and measuring link criticality. The paper includes an application of the NCI for flood risk planning to the Deerfield River basin in Vermont. Highly critical segments can be identified as those with the highest NCI values, and mitigation projects can be designed to mitigate the risk. The application finds that relatively high traffic flows can make highly vulnerable links critical due to a lack of redundant routes with adequate capacity to handle flows when they are disrupted by floods. Reducing risk to the highway system from flooding means either (1) improving the segment or crossing and thereby reducing its vulnerability score, or (2) influencing regional traffic flows to prevent disruptive effects on travelers when a disruption occurs. Addressing the vulnerability of the segment or crossing can be done with an engineering design that is sensitive to the project context and the need to improve its ability to withstand higher stream flows in the future.

Suggested Citation

  • James L. Sullivan & Karen Sentoff & Joseph Segale & Norman L. Marshall & Evan Fitzgerald & Roy Schiff, 2024. "A new risk-based measure of link criticality for flood risk planning," Transportation, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2051-2071, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:51:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-023-10396-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-023-10396-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-023-10396-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-023-10396-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan Murray & Timothy Matisziw & Tony Grubesic, 2007. "Critical network infrastructure analysis: interdiction and system flow," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 103-117, June.
    2. Reggiani, Aura & Nijkamp, Peter & Lanzi, Diego, 2015. "Transport resilience and vulnerability: The role of connectivity," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 4-15.
    3. Qian Ye & Hyun Kim, 2019. "Assessing network vulnerability of heavy rail systems with the impact of partial node failures," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1591-1614, October.
    4. Sullivan, J.L. & Novak, D.C. & Aultman-Hall, L. & Scott, D.M., 2010. "Identifying critical road segments and measuring system-wide robustness in transportation networks with isolating links: A link-based capacity-reduction approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 323-336, June.
    5. Juan Carlos García-Palomares & Javier Gutiérrez & Juan Carlos Martín & Borja Moya-Gómez, 2018. "An analysis of the Spanish high capacity road network criticality," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1139-1159, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohamad Darayi & Kash Barker & Joost R. Santos, 2017. "Component Importance Measures for Multi-Industry Vulnerability of a Freight Transportation Network," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1111-1136, December.
    2. Xu, Xiangdong & Qu, Kai & Chen, Anthony & Yang, Chao, 2021. "A new day-to-day dynamic network vulnerability analysis approach with Weibit-based route adjustment process," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    3. Almoghathawi, Yasser & Barker, Kash & Rocco, Claudio M. & Nicholson, Charles D., 2017. "A multi-criteria decision analysis approach for importance identification and ranking of network components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 142-151.
    4. Li, Tao & Rong, Lili & Yan, Kesheng, 2019. "Vulnerability analysis and critical area identification of public transport system: A case of high-speed rail and air transport coupling system in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 55-70.
    5. Novak, D.C. & Sullivan, J.F. & Sentoff, K. & Dowds, J., 2020. "A framework to guide strategic disinvestment in roadway infrastructure considering social vulnerability," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 436-451.
    6. Pablo E. Achurra-Gonzalez & Panagiotis Angeloudis & Nils Goldbeck & Daniel J. Graham & Konstantinos Zavitsas & Marc E. J. Stettler, 2019. "Evaluation of port disruption impacts in the global liner shipping network," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-21, December.
    7. López, Fernando A. & Páez, Antonio & Carrasco, Juan A. & Ruminot, Natalia A., 2017. "Vulnerability of nodes under controlled network topology and flow autocorrelation conditions," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 77-87.
    8. Kashin Sugishita & Yasuo Asakura, 2021. "Vulnerability studies in the fields of transportation and complex networks: a citation network analysis," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-34, March.
    9. Sullivan, James L. & Novak, David C., 2024. "A method for evaluating accessibility in transportation problems considering social vulnerability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(3), pages 646-659.
    10. Qian Ye & Hyun Kim, 2019. "Partial Node Failure in Shortest Path Network Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-21, November.
    11. Almotahari, Amirmasoud & Yazici, Anil, 2021. "A computationally efficient metric for identification of critical links in large transportation networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    12. Hong, Wei-Ting & Clifton, Geoffrey & Nelson, John D., 2022. "Rail transport system vulnerability analysis and policy implementation: Past progress and future directions," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 299-308.
    13. Bellè, Andrea & Zeng, Zhiguo & Duval, Carole & Sango, Marc & Barros, Anne, 2022. "Modeling and vulnerability analysis of interdependent railway and power networks: Application to British test systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    14. Almotahari, Amirmasoud & Yazici, M. Anil, 2019. "A link criticality index embedded in the convex combinations solution of user equilibrium traffic assignment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 67-82.
    15. Nan Zhang & Daniel J. Graham & Daniel Hörcher & Prateek Bansal, 2021. "A causal inference approach to measure the vulnerability of urban metro systems," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3269-3300, December.
    16. Richard Connors & David Watling, 2015. "Assessing the Demand Vulnerability of Equilibrium Traffic Networks via Network Aggregation," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 367-395, June.
    17. Sarker, Rumana Islam & Kaplan, Sigal & Mailer, Markus & Timmermans, Harry J.P., 2019. "Applying affective event theory to explain transit users’ reactions to service disruptions," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 593-605.
    18. Yao He & Yongchun Yang & Meimei Wang & Xudong Zhang, 2022. "Resilience Analysis of Container Port Shipping Network Structure: The Case of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-17, August.
    19. Cats, Oded & Jenelius, Erik, 2015. "Planning for the unexpected: The value of reserve capacity for public transport network robustness," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 47-61.
    20. Mohammad Mojtahedi & Sidney Newton & Jason Meding, 2017. "Predicting the resilience of transport infrastructure to a natural disaster using Cox’s proportional hazards regression model," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 85(2), pages 1119-1133, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:51:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s11116-023-10396-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.