IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Estimation of indirect cost and evaluation of protective measures for infrastructure vulnerability: A case study on the transalpine transport corridor

  • Lorenzo Masiero

    ()

    (Istituto Ricerche Economiche (IRE), Università della Svizzera Italiana, Svizzera)

  • Rico Maggi

    ()

    (Istituto Ricerche Economiche (IRE), Università della Svizzera Italiana, Svizzera)

Infrastructure vulnerability is a topic of rising interest in the scientific literature for both the general increase of unexpected events and the strategic importance of certain links. Protective investments are extremely costly and risks are distributed in space and time which poses important decision problems to the public sector decision makers. In an economic prospective, the evaluation of infrastructure vulnerability is oriented on the estimation of direct and indirect costs of hazards. Although the estimation of direct costs is straightforward, the evaluation of indirect cost involves factors non-directly observable making the approximation a difficult issue. This paper provides an estimate of the indirect costs caused by a two weeks closure of the north-south Gotthard road corridor, one of the most important infrastructure links in Europe, and implements a cost-benefit analysis tool that allows the evaluation of measures ensuring a full protection along the corridor. The identification of the indirect cost relies on the generalized cost estimation, which parameters come from two stated preference experiments, the first based on actual condition whereas the second assumes a road closure. The procedure outlined in this paper proposes a methodology aimed to identify and quantify the economic vulnerability associated with a road transport infrastructure and, to evaluate the economic and social efficiency of a vulnerability reduction by the consideration of protective measures.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://doc.rero.ch/lm.php?url=1000,42,6,20100304135013-ZZ/wp1003.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by USI Università della Svizzera italiana in its series Quaderni della facoltà di Scienze economiche dell'Università di Lugano with number 1003.

as
in new window

Length: 17 pages
Date of creation: Mar 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:lug:wpaper:1003
Contact details of provider: Web page: https://www.bul.sbu.usi.ch

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Chen, Anthony & Yang, Hai & Lo, Hong K. & Tang, Wilson H., 2002. "Capacity reliability of a road network: an assessment methodology and numerical results," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 225-252, March.
  2. Simona Bolis & Rico Maggi, 2003. "Logistics Strategy and Transport Service Choices: An Adaptive Stated Preference Experiment," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 490-504.
  3. Danielis, Romeo & Marcucci, Edoardo & Rotaris, Lucia, 2005. "Logistics managers' stated preferences for freight service attributes," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 201-215, May.
  4. Michael Taylor & Somenahalli Sekhar & Glen D'Este, 2006. "Application of Accessibility Based Methods for Vulnerability Analysis of Strategic Road Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 267-291, September.
  5. Berdica, Katja, 2002. "An introduction to road vulnerability: what has been done, is done and should be done," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 117-127, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lug:wpaper:1003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alessio Tutino)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.